I 


J-fARRY  pRAWFORD  |3l,ack.. 


1 

George  Washington  Flowers 

Memorial  Collection 

DUKE  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARY 

ESTABLISHED  BY  THE 

FAMILY  OF 

COLONEL  FLOWERS 

TRIA  I, 


OF 


HARRYCRAWFORD  BLACK, 


FOR  THE    KILLING   OF 


COL.  W.  W.  McKAIG,  Jr., 


CIRCUIT  COURT  OF  THE  SIXTH  JUDICIAL  CIRCUIT  OF  MARYLAND,  SITTING 
AT  FREDERICK  CITY,  APRIL  11, 1871, 

BEFORE 


Hon.  W.  P.  MAULSBT,  Chief  Justice. 
Hon.  JOHN  A.  LYNCH,  Associate  Justice. 
Hon.  J.  VEIRS  BOWIC,  Associate  Justice. 


V£ 


COUNSEL  FOR  THE    PROSECUTION  : 

MILTON    "WHITNEY,    Esq.,    of    Baltimore;    ISAAC    D.    JONES, 

Attorney  General  of  Maryland  ;  FRANCIS  BRENG-LE, 

State's  Attorney  of  Frederick  County.  ' 

COUNSEL  FOR  THE   DEFENSE  I 

Hon.  D.  W.  VOORHEES,  of  Indiana;  A.  K.  SYSTER,  Esq.,  of  Hagers- 

town,  Maryland  ;  FRED.  J.  NELSON,  Esq.,  of  Frederick, 

Maryland  ;  LLOYD  LOWNDES,  of  Cumberland, 

Maryland;  WILLIAM  M.  PRICE,  of 

Cumberland,  Maryland. 


WASHINGTON,  D.  C. : 

1871. 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2011  with  funding  from 
Duke  University  Libraries 


http://www.archive.org/details/trialofharrycrawOOblac 


INTRODUCTION. 


Generally  around  criminal  prosecution  gather  all  the  degrading 
influences  of  human  life.  Within  the  prisoner's  box  you  look  for 
those  upon  whose  countenance  is  stamped  with  heavy  impress  the 
evidences  of  crime  and  degredation.  You  listen  to  the  case  to  be 
tried  with  the  expectation  of  hearing  details  that  sicken  the  heart, 
and  tend  to  demoralize  social  law.  Especially  is  this  true  of  the 
trial  of  capital  cases.  In  these,  the  evidence  is  usually  of  the  most 
revolting  character,  marking  step  by  step  the  decline  of  the 
wretched  prisoner  from  the  paths  of  virtue  and  well  doing,  where, 
perhaps,  his  feet  had  first  been  placed  by  a  kind  father  and  loving 
mother,  into  the  pools  of  vice  and  wickedness  until  completely 
enveloped  in  their  slimey  depths. 

But  there  has  been  within  the  history  of  criminal  jurisprudence 
some  few  exceptions  to  the  general  rule ;  some  few  cases  tried 
where  the  court  proceedings  and  the  surroundings  of  the  case  have 
been  in  a  great  measure  softened  by  the  extenuating  circumstances 
that  induced  the  commission  of  the  crime  and  the  social  and  moral 
standing  of  the  prisoner  on  trial.  But  none  within  the  whole 
range  of  judicial  investigation  where  such  has  been  the  case  in  as 
great  a  degree  as  in  the  trial  that  forms  the  subject-matter  of 
these  pages. 

The  cases  referred  to  are  within  the  knowledge  of  all  who  have 
watched  the  progress  of  events  in  our  land,  and  are  doubtless 
familiar  to  nearly  all  who  will  peruse  this  work,  and  the  differ, 
ence  between  this  and  those  can  be  easily  marked  by  following  a 
recitation  of  the  facts  in  the  remarkable  and  interesting  trial  here 
spread  before  them. 

II  arwy  Crawford  Black,  who  occupied  the  prisoner's  place,  and 
was  on  trial  for  his  life  in  this  case,  was  born  in  the  city  of  Cum- 
berland, Alleghany  county,  Maryland,  in  May,  1^46,  and  is  conse- 
quently twenty-four  years  of  age,  but  the  weight  of  years  have 
rested  lightly  on  his  brow,  and  he  does  not  look  as  though  he  had 
yet  crossed  the  threshold  from  youth  into  manhood.  In  his  early 
days  he  seems  to  havereceived  the  foundation  of  an  education,  both 
moral  and  intellectual,  that  gave  him  the  respect  and  won  for  him 


VI  TRIAL    OF   HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

the  admiration  <»f  all  who  knew  bim,  and  that  followed  him  through 

all  the  varied  changes  of  his  eventful  life,  and  fianally  in  the  hour 
of  his  dreadful  peril  loomed  up  as  the  brightest  phase  that  sur- 
rounded the  investigation  of  the  case  in  which  lie  had  srn^h  fear- 
ful interests  involved.  Indeed  it  may  be  said  with  emphasis  that 
never  within  the  pale  of  legal  inquiry  has  such  a  character  been 
produced  upon  a  case  of  this  kind.  Those  who  had  played  with 
him  in  childhood,  and  knew  him  in  advancing  years,  were  called, 
and  told  of  his  early  spotless  character  and  amiable  disposition. 
Those  who  knew  him  amidst  carnage,  and  saw  him  surrounded 
with  all  the  evil  influences  of  prison  life,  come  and  told  with  what 
unerring  aim  he  pursued  the  guiding  star  set  for  him  by  his 
early  teachers,  and  how  among  those  influences  he  was  still  the 
same  good  and  virtuous  boy  he  had  been  in  childhood.  Those 
who  had  seen  him  in  the  far  off  fields  of  lMexico,  and  the  western 
praries,  were  there  to  testify  to  his  spotless  reputation  and  gentle- 
manly conduct  while  there.  In  fact  all  who  were  called  from  the  four 
quarters  of  the  country  testified  to  his  untarnished  reputation  and 
spotless  character.  In  personal  appearance  he  is  what  the  world 
would  call  handsome,  about  medium  height,  of  slender  frame, 
with  a  clear,  frank,  manly  expression  of  countenance,  a  searching 
black  eye,  and  with  all  a  most  pleasing  address.  During  the  pro- 
gress of  the  trial  his  manly  bearing  was  the  subject  of  much  flat- 
tering comment.  His  youthful  appearance  and  prepossessing  man- 
ners won  him  many  friends  among  those  who  had  never  seen  him 
before  he  appeared  before  them  as  a  prisoner  on  trial  for  his  life. 
His  family  connections  are  among  the  most  respectable  in  West- 
em  Maryland,  and  although  straightened  in  circumstances,  they 
hold  an  honored  place  in  the  estimation  of  the  people  among  whom 
they  live.  He  is  a  relative  of  the  late  Hon.  J.  Dixon  Roman  and 
Hon.  J.  Philip  Roman,  both  of  whom,  when  living,  were  recog- 
nized as  leading  men  in  the  political  and  financial  affairs  of  the 
State. 

Colonel  William  W.  McKaig,  Jr.,  who  fell  by  his  hand,  is  a  de- 
scendant from  a  long  line  of  wealthy  and  highly  respectable  ances- 
tors. He  was  the  second  son  of  the  Hon.  W.  W.  McKaig,  and 
nephew  of  General  Thomas  J.  McKaig,  both  of  whom  are  known 
as  among  the  leading  men  of  the  State  of  Maryland  as  representa- 
tives of  her  material  interests.  He  was  born  April  5, 1842,  in  the 
city  of  Cumberland,  and  was  consequently  twenty-eight  years  of 
age,  He  served  in  the  southern  i>ebellion,  and  was,  when  the  war 
closed,  a  cavalry  captain.    When  killed  he  wras  largely  engaged  in 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL   W.   W.    M  KAIG,  JR.  VII 

manufacturing  in  Cumberland,  and  largely  enjoyed  the  respect  of 
the  community  in  which  he  lived.  Tn  personal  appearance  he  was 
remarkably  fine-looking,  large  in  statue,  but  well  proportioned, 
and  was  possessed  of  all  those  attractions  of  mind  and  heart  that 
make  a  man  a  genial  companion.  His  death  was  much  lamented 
where  he  was  known.  He  was  killed  on  Baltimore  street,  the 
principal  thoroughfare  of  the  city  of  Cumberland,  on  the  morn- 
ing of  the  17th  of  October,  1870;  and  the  reader  will  find  in  the 
foregoing  pages  a  full  and  uncolored  recitation  of  the  facts,  as 
sworn  to  by  the  witnesses,  of  that  killing  and  the  circumstances 
attending  it. 

The  indictment  upon  which  this  case  was  tried  was  found  by 
the  grand  jury  of  Allegahany  county,  Maryland,  at  the  October 
term  of  Court,  1870,  which  was  in  session  when  the  tragedy  took 
place.  The  trial  was  posponed  from  that  term  to  the  January 
term  following.  At  the  January  term  it  was  called  and  proceeded 
with,  so  far  as  to  draw  eight  jurors,  wheu,  upon  the  affidavit  of 
the  State's  attorney,  it  was  removed  to  Frederick  county  for  trial. 

The  case  was  called  upon  the  morning  of  the  11th  of  April, 
1871,  at  Frederick,  with  the  most  absorbing  interest  being  felt  in 
the  proceedings,  and  probably  no  case  was  ever  tried  where  all 
the  elements  of  a  fair  and  impartial  trial  were  drawn  together 
in  a  more  eminent  degree  than  in  this  case. 

The  Court  was  composed  of  three  judges,  each  of  whom  have 
always  enjoyed  the  respect  of  all  who  knew  them  for  their  ability 
in  the  practice  of  the  profession  of  the  law,  of  which  they  are 
now  the  exponents.  The  jury  was  composed  of  the  most  substan- 
tial and  respectable  citizens  of  Frederick  county,  most  of  them, 
indeed  all  of  them,  but  two,  were  thrifty  farmers,  living  distant 
from  Frederick  several  miles,  and  none  of  them  resided  in  the 
city.  They  were  nearly  all  men  of  families  and  possessed  of  con- 
siderable means,  and  for  intelligence  would  compare  more  than 
favorably  with  any  jury  that  was  ever  irnpanneled  for  the  trial  of 
a  criminal  cause  in  a  court  of  justice  in  this  country.  Every  man 
upon  the  panncl  was  regarded  as  a,  reliable,  worthy,  and  highly 
respectable  citizen  and  beyond  reproach  in  every  sense  of  the  word. 
Below  we  print  brief  biographical  sketches  of  each  of  the  judges 
and  counsel. 

William  Finckney  Maulsby,  Chief  Justice  of  the  sixth 
judicial  district  of  Maryland,  and  one  of  the  judges  of  the  court 
of  appeals  of  that  State  was  born  in  Harford  county,  Maryland, 
in  the  year  1S15,  and  is  therefore  now  in  the  prime  of  a  ripe,  expe- 


VIII  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    CLACK 

rienced  manhood  ;  he  is  a  son  of  General  Isreal  Maulsby,  who  was 
for  many  years  a  distinguished  lawyer  of  Harford  county.  Judge 
Maulsby  received  the  benefits  of  a  collegiate  education,  after 
which  he  studied  law  with  his  father;  soon  after  lie  had  com- 
menced the  practice  he  was  elected  to  the  State  senate,  and  served 
with  much  ability  in  that  body;  he  was  afterwards,  for  several 
years,  States  attorney  of  Carroll  county,  Maryland,  from  whence 
he  removed  to  Frederick,  where  he  now  resides.  At  the  break- 
ing out  of  the  late  war  he  took  strong  grounds  against  secession, 
and  entered  and  served  with  distinction  in  the  Union  army 
throughout  the  war  :is  colonel  of  the  first  regiment  of  the  Poto- 
mac Home  Brigade,  infantry.  In  1866  he  was  the  Democratic 
nominee  for  Congress  from  the  fourth  congressional  district  of 
Maryland  and  was  defeated  by  a  very  small  majority  by  Hon. 
Francis  Thomas,  the  Republican  nominee.  In  1867  he  was  elected 
a  member  of  the  constitutional  convention ,  from  Frederick  county, 
that  framed  the  present  constitution  of  Maryland.  He  was  ap- 
pointed to  his  present  position  early  in  1870,  to  fill  the  vacancy 
caused  by  the  death  of  the  late  Judge  Melson,  whose  brother-in- 
law  he  was.  He  is  the  father-in-law  of  Hon.  John  Ritchie,  the 
present  member  of  Congress  from  the  fourth  congressional  district 
of  Maryland.  Judge  Maulsby  has  always  been  regarded  as  among 
the  leading  legal  minds  in  the  State,  and  brought  to  the  bench  a 
knowledge  of  the  law,  and  its  practice  gained  by  a  long  and  emi- 
nently successful  career  as  an  attorney. 

John  A.  Lynch,  one  of  the  associate  justices  of  the  Circuit 
Court,  of  the  sixth  judicial  district  of  Maryland,  is  the  son  of 
Hon.  William  Lynch,  who  was  at  one  time  one  of  the  most  promi- 
nent politicians  of  Western  Maryland.  The  subject  of  our  sketch 
was  born  in  1825,  in  Frederick  county,  Maryland,  was  educated 
at  Pennsylvania  College,  Gettysburg,  Pennsylvania.  After 
graduating,  he  began  the  study  of  the  law  with  M.  B.  Luckett,  a 
prominent  lawyer  of  the  Frederick  bar,  now  deceased.  He  was 
admitted  to  the  bar  in  1851,  and  immediately  began  the  practice 
of  his  profession  at  Frederick,  where  he  has  since  resided.  In 
1855  he  was  elected  States  Attorney  of  Frederick  county,  which 
position  he  held  four  years.  In  1867,  he  was  elected  to  the  posi- 
tion he  now  fills  with  much  ability. 

William  Veirs  Bowie,  associate  justice  of  the  Circuit  Court 
of  the  sixth  judicial  district  of  Mayland,  was  born  in  1819,  in 
Montgomery  county,  Maryland.  His  father  was  a  native  of 
Rouen,  France,  his  mother  a  daughter  of  Colonel  William  Yeirs, 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W".    M  KAIG,  JR.  IX 

of  Rockville,  Maryland.  At  an  early  age  Mr.  Bowie  gave  promise 
of  more  than  ordinary  ability,  perseverance,  and.  firmness  of  pur- 
pose, promises  fulfilled  in  his  later  years.  He  studied  law  with 
the  late  John  Brewer,  Esq.,  a  member  of  note  of  the  Montgomery 
county  bar.  In  1849,  being  only  80  years  of  age,  he  was  elected 
States  Attorney,  appointed  assistant  attorney  general  of  the 
State,  and  afterward  was  State's  Attorney  of  Montgomery  county, 
which  position  he  held  by  successive  elections  until  18G7,  when  he 
was  chosen  to  the  associate  judgeship.  Apart  from  discharging 
the  duties  of  various  offices  of  public  trust  and  the  laborious  pur- 
suit of  professional  studies,  he  was  for  many  years  a  leading  poli- 
tician of  Western  Maryland.  In  the  discharge  of  his  duties  he 
has  a  pleasing,  yet  forcible  manner,  and  states  his  opinions  with 
emphasis  and  without  elaboration. 

Mixtox  Whitney  was  born  in  the  village  of  Ashburnham, 
Worcester  county,  Massachusetts,  in  the  year  1S23.  His  parents 
not  having  the  means  of  educating  him,  his  life's  earlist  lesson 
was  one  of  sternest  self-reliance  and  unremitting  toil.  He  was 
thus  made  the  architect  of  his  own  fortune  and  fame,  and  is  essen- 
tially a  self-educated,  self-made  man.  For  several  years  he  was 
employed  in  a  store  in  his  native  village.  Having  a  strong  desire 
for  the  profession  of  the  law,  he  finally  entered  the  office  of  Hon. 
Nathaniel  Wood,  of  Fitchburg,  Massachusetts,  and  the  inspira- 
tions of  ardent  genius,  the  longing  of  the  noble  ambition  that 
sustained  him  in  the  days  of  adversity,  together  with  natural  tal- 
ents of  high  order,  soon  placed  him  among  the  leading  men  of  the 
bar  of  his  native  State.  Mr.  Whitney  pursued  his  legal  studies 
under  Mr.  Wood  for  three  years,  and  at  the  age  of  twenty-three 
was  admitted  to  the  Worcester  county  bar.  From  the  beginning 
of  his  professional  life  Mr.  Whitney  was  a  marked  man,  and  give 
evidence  of  those  great  talents  which  have  gained  for  him  his  high 
position  in  Maryland.  Soon  after  his  admission  to  the  Massachu- 
setts bar  Mr.  Whitney  married  Miss  Annie  Weston,  one  of  Balti. 
more's  most  accomplished  ladies,  and  a  direct  descendent  of  John 
Alden,  immortalized  by  Longfellow  in  his  "Courtship  of  Miles 
Standish."  In  1850  he  removed  to  Baltimore,  and  although  almost 
a  stranger  there,  in  a  comparatively  brief  period  he  attained  a 
high  distinction.  During  his  practice  in  Massachusetts  he  was 
engaged  as  leading  counsel  in  the  celebrated  murder  trial  of  Cook, 
charged  with  having  poisoned  his  wife  fourteen  years  before  his 
arraignment.  In  this  case  the  notorious  Dr.  Webster,  who  was 
afterwards  executed  for  the   murder  of  Dr.   Parkman,   figured 


X  TRIAL   OF   HARRY    CRAWFORD   BLACK 

conspicuously  as  a  witness  for  the  State,  testifying  that  he  had 
discovered  traces  of  poison  in  the  remains  after  the  lapse  of  four- 
teen years.  The  trial  resulted  in  the  acquittal  of  Cook.  The 
success  attending  Mr.  "Whitney  in  the  State  of  his  birth  was 
speedily  increased  in  Baltimore.  His  rise  was  rapid  and  sub- 
stantial. In  1853,  after  a  residence  in  Baltimore  of  only  three 
years,  he  was  selected  by  the  American  party  as  their  candidate 
for  the  position  of  State's  attorney  of  that  city  ;  being  elected 
he  entered  upon  the  duties  of  his  office,  holding  it  for  six  years, 
when  he  resigned  and  commenced  actively  the  general  practice  of 
his  profession.  "While  State's  attorney  of  Baltimore  the  turbulent 
spirit  which  manifested  itself  at  that  time  in  political  partisanship, 
required  of  him,  as  an  officer  of  justice,  unflinching  courage  and 
the  most  laborious  prosecution  of  lawlessness  and  crime.  His 
course  during  this  trying  period  of  his  professional  life  has  given 
him  a  distinction  that  will  be  honorably  perpetuated  in  the  history 
of  Maryland. 

Among  the  most  notable  trials  in  which  he  was  engaged  as 
State's  attorney,  was  that  of  Henry  Gambrill,  who,  with  three 
others,  was  convicted  and  executed  in  Baltimore  for  the  murder 
of  a  policeman.  The  trial  and  execution  of  these  men  created  in- 
tense excitement  throughout  Maryland,  and  so  open  and  desper- 
ate was  the  lawlessness  which  had  inaugurated  a  reign  of  terror 
in  Baltimore  that  Mr.  Whitney  was  met  by  repeated  attempts 
upon  his  life;  once,  while  making  his  argument  for" the  prosecu- 
tion of  Gambrill,  and  afterward  on  his  way  home  from  the  court- 
room in  his  carriage,  fortunately  escaping  unhurt;  but  a  strict 
guard  of  his  house  by  the  police  force  was  absolutely  necessary 
until  the  return  of  peace  and  quiet.  In  1864  Mr.  W.  was  engaged 
for  the  defense  in  the  well-remembered  trial  of  Colonel  Paca  for 
the  killing  of  his  two  nephews,  which  attracted  the-  greatest  in- 
terest throughout  the  State  and  resulted  in  the  acquittal  of  the 
prisoner.  The  last  great  trial  in  Maryland  in  which  Mr.  W.  bore 
a  leading  part,  previous  to  the  recent  trial  in  Frederick,  was  that 
of  John  Clare,  who,  having  been  convicted  and  sentenced  to  exe- 
cution in  Baltimore  county,  obtained  a  new  trial  in  Baltimore 
city,  resulting  in  his  acquittal.  Since  his  retirement  from  the 
office  of  State's  attorney,  Mr.  W.  has  been  engaged  in  most  of 
the  great  criminal  trials  in  Maryland,  those  named  being  but  a 
few  of  the  most  prominent  in  which  he  has  distinguished  himself 
and  established  his  reputation  as  the  first  criminal  lawyer  of  Mary- 
land. It  is  said  by  competent  judges  that  Mr.  Whitney  has  been 
engaged  in  more  murder  trials  than  any  other  lawyer  in  America. 


FOR   KILLING    COLONEL   W.    W.    M  KAIG,    JR.  XI 

The  most  important  civil  case  tried  by  liim  was  that  of  Carwicfc  & 
Ramsay,  vs.  The  United  States.  It  grew  out  of  a  contract  for 
carrying  mails  in  New  Mexico  and  involved  the  immense  amount 
of  $3,000,000,  Mr.  Whitney  was  retained  by  Postmaster  Genera] 
Blair,  and  the  suit  was  decided  in  favor  of  the  Government.  In 
politics  Mr.  W.  was  reared  a  Massachusetts  Democrat;  after  his 
removal  to  Baltimore  he  became  an  earnest  supporter  of  the  prin- 
ciples of  the  American  party;  but  since  retiring  from  office  he  has 
steadily  declined  taking  active  part  in  political  life,  though  re- 
peatedly urged  to  become  a  candidate  for  Congress.  A  firm  Union 
man  during  the  late  war,  his  course  was  characterized  by  such 
liberality  of  opinion  and  such  consistency  of  action  that  he  did  not 
render  himself  offensive  to  any  who  differed  from  him  in  their 
views  of  that  contest.  Since  the  war  he  has  never  given  his  adhe- 
sion to  the  radical  measures  of  the  party  in  power.  In  person, 
Mr.  W.  is  delicate,  features  regular,  showing  great  power,  facial 
expression;  bright,  steady  eye  that  sees  everything  and  holds 
everybody  tinder  its  spell;  well-shaped,  mobile  mouth;  his  voice 
clear  and  sonorous.  In  style,  his  elocution  is  finished— often  im- 
passioned, his  language  chaste  and  forcible,  with  manner  and 
gesture  graceful  and  appropriate.  He  has  a  special  talent  in 
cross-examination.  He  reads  witnesses,  and  while  always  courte- 
ous and  forbearing,  makes  the  most  of  all  the  knowledge  within 
his  reach.  It  requires  more  of  the  art  of  concealment  than  most 
men  possess  and  more  fencing  than  many  lawyers  can  avail  them- 
selves of  to  keep  from  him  what  he  desires  to  be  brought  out  in 
cross-examination,  and  from  the  beginning  to  the  end  of  a  case  he 
is  ever  on  the  alert,  always  vigilant  and  tireless,  employing  every 
honorable  means  to  insure  success.  Mr.  Whitney's  legal  know- 
ledge is  profound;  trained  from  early  boyhood  to  habits  of  close 
mental  application,  and  disciplined  by  necessity  in  methodical 
ways  of  business  life,  he  has  mastered  the  intellectual  difficulties 
of  his  profession  with  a  zealous  and  comprehensive  ability,  and  is 
justly  considered  the  ornament  of  that  profession  which  Edmund 
Burke  characterized  as  "the  pride  of  the  human  intellect  and  the 
collected  wisdom  of  ages,  combining  the  principles  of  original 
justice  with  the  boundless  variety  of  human  concerns." 

Isaac  D.  Jones  was  born  in  Somerset  county,  Maryland,  on 
the  1st  day  of  November,  1806.  He  was  educated  at  the  Wash- 
ington Academy,  in  that  county.  He  studied  law  in  that  county, 
and  was  admitted  to  the  bar  in  1832.  He  was  a  delegate  from  that 
county  to  the  General  Assembly  of  Maryland,  at  the  December 


XIE  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLAOK 

session,  1832-'33,  and  again  in  1835  and  in  1840-'41,  He  was  elected 
in  May,  1841,  to  represent  the  first  congressional  district  of  Mary- 
land, in  the  Congress  of  the  United  States,  which  assembled  in 
extra  session,  in  May,  1841,  and  served  during  the  three  sessions 
of  that  Congress.  After  this  service,  he  was  for  many  years  en- 
gaged in  the  practice  of  law,  and  in  agricultural  pursuits  at  Prin- 
cess Anne,  in  Somerset  county,  Maryland.  In  April,  1SG4,  he 
was  elected  a  delegate  from  that  county  to  the  Constitutional 
Convention  which  met  at  Annapolis  in  April  1864,  and  framed 
the  Maryland  constitution  of  1864.  In  November  18G6.  he  was 
elected  a  delegate  from  Somerset  county,  to  the  General  Assem- 
bly of  Maryland,  which  met  in  January  1867,  and  passed  the  act, 
which  was  adopted  by  a  vote  of  the  people,  calling  the  constitu- 
tional convention  which  assembled  at  Annapolis,  in  May  1867, 
and  framed  the  present  constitution  of  Maryland.  Mr.  Jones 
was  also  a  member  of  that  convention  from  his  native  county. 
After  the  adoption  of  the  constitution  of  1867,  at  the  November 
election  in  that  year,  he  was  elected  to  the  office  of  attorney  gen- 
eral of  Maryland,  Shortly  after  entering  upon  the  duties  of  that 
office,  in  January  1868,  he  removed  to  the  city  of  Baltimore,  where 
he  now  resides,  engaged  in  the  practice  of  law,  and  in  the  dis- 
charge of  his  official  duties,  as  attorney  general  of  Maryland. 

Daniel  W.  Voouiiees,  whose  fame  as  an  advocate  is  as  broad 
as  the  limits  of  our  common  country,  was  born  in  Fountain 
county,  Indiana,  on  the  26th  day  of  September,  1828.  His  mother 
was  a  native  of  Maryland,  having  been  born  in  Baltimore  county, 
near  Towsentown.  He  was  educated  at  the  Indiana  Asbury  Uni- 
versity, and  graduated  therefrom  in  1849;  immediately  began  the 
study  of  the  law  and  was  admitted  to  practice  in  1851.  In  1858 
he  was  appointed  United  State's  District  Attorney  for  Indiana, 
which  position  he  filled  with  marked  ability  until  1861.  In  the 
latter  part  of  1859  became  prominently  into  notice  in  the  East  by 
his  wonderful  effort  in  behalf  of  Cook,  one  of  John  Brown's  men, 
and,  despite  the  terribly  bitter  state  of  public  sentiment  in  Vir- 
ginia against  Cook,  his  argument  in  behalf  of  this  unfortunate 
man  elicited  the  warmest  commendation  of  all  who  listened  to  it. 
In  the  West  there  is  scarcely  a  criminal  trial  involving  life  that 
his  presence  is  not  sought,  and  his  reputation  as  an  advocate 
stands  preeminently  high.  His  effort  in  the  Mary  Harris  case 
was  one  of  the  most  brilliant  on  record  in  the  history  of  criminal 
X>rosecution,  and  the  one  we  have  the  pleasure  to  present  in  these 
pages  is  another  evidence  of  his  remarkable  power  as  a  speaker 
and  logical  thinker. 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    TV.    M  KAIG,   JR.  XIII 

He  has  served  about  ten  years  in  the  Congress  of  the  United 
States,  and  is  still  a  member  of  that  body.  He  is  possessed  of  a 
kind,  genial  disposition,  and  an  address  that  wins  to  him  all  with 
whom  he  comes  in  contact.  He  is  universally  admired  and  re- 
spected by  all  who  know  him  of  whatever  politics  or  creed. 

Andrew  K.  Syester,  whose  leading  connection  with  this  case 
marks  him  as  a  man  of  great  ability,  was  born  in  Berkeley  county. 
Virginia,  March  11, 1829.  "While  yet  a  mere  youth  he  entered  Mar- 
shall College,  at  Mercersburg,  Pennsylvania,  graduating  therefrom 
in  1850,  in  the  fall  of  that  year  he  began  the  study  of  law  with 
Jervis  Spencer,  Esq.,  of  Hagerstown,  Maryland;  was  admitted  to 
the  bar  in  January,  1853,  and  soon  after  began  the  practice  of  his 
profession  in  Hagerstown,  where  he  has  since  pursued  it  with 
great  success.  Even  at  the  outset  of  his  career  he  met  with  very 
remarkable  favor  from  the  people  of  his  county,  and  in  the  fall  of 
1853  lne  was  elected  to  the  legislature  of  Maryland  from  Wash- 
ington county.  Although  but  24  years  of  age,  his  parliamentary 
talent  was  very  apparent,  and  he  soon  ranked  with  the  foremost 
of  his  compeers;  he  served  with  marked  ability  upon  the  import- 
ant committees  of  "Ways  and  Means  and  the  Judiciary.  After 
two  years  service  in  the  legislature,  he  was  elected  in  1855  State's 
attorney  of  Washington  county,  which  position  he  held  until 
1859,  performing  with  distinction  the  duties  of  his  position. 
Soon  after  the  expiration  of  his  term  of  office  as  State's  attorney 
the  war  broke  out,  and  for  several  years  the  unsettled  condition 
of  the  country  surrounding  Mr.  Syester 's  home  prevented  any 
advancement  in  political  life,  and,  until  1S67,  he  did  not  again 
come  conspicuously  into  notice,  save  in  the  practice  of  his  pro- 
fession, in  which,  during  these  years  of  battle  and  blood,  he  was 
rapidly  gaining  a  leading  role  and  gathering  experience  and  wis- 
dom from  the  events  transpiring  about  him.  In  1867,  elected  a 
member  of  the  Constitutional  Convention,  he  served  upon  some 
of  the  most  important  committees  in  that  body  which  framed  the 
present  constitution  of  Maryland.  Ile-elected  to  the  legislature 
in  1S68,  he  served  as  chairman  of  the  Committee  of  Ways  and 
Means.  In  legislative,  as  well  as  in  legal  life,  Mr.  Syester  has 
been  eminently  successfnl,  and  in  private  association  his  winning 
amiability  and  genial  nature  make  him  a  popular  favorite.  In 
18(58  he  was  engaged  to  defend  Mrs.  Rowland,  indicted  for  the 
murder  of  her  husband;  popular  feeling  was  exceedingly  strong 
against  the  prisoner,  yet  he  obtained  her  acquittal,  his  masterly 
management  of  that  case  marking  him  as  the  possessor  of  legal  talent 


XTV  TRIAL    OF    IIARRY    CRAWIDRD    CLACK 

far  above  the  average.  He  has  an  immense  practice  in  the  differ- 
ent courts  of  his  State,  a  practice  second  to  none,  perhaps,  in  the 
Stale  ami  in  the  trial  recorded  in  these  pages,  in  which  he  was 

engaged,  he  has  fnlly  sustained  his  high  reputation  as  an  able 
advocate  and  profound  thinner.  As  a  high  toned  gentleman, 
thorough  scholar, upright  attorney,  true  friend,  and  an  ornament 
to  his  profession  Mr.  Syester  has  no  superior. 

Frederick  J.  Nelsox,  Esq..  on*}  of  the  leading  counsel  in  the 
defense  of  Harry  C.  Black,  and  the  acknowledged  head  of  the 
Frederick,  Maryland,  bar,  is  88  years  of  age,  of  most  pleasing, 
polished  address  and  intellectual  appearance.  He  is  a  native  of 
Frederick.  Maryland,  the  son  of  the  late  Judge  Nelson,  chief 
justice  of  the  sixth  judicial  district,  and  one  of  the  judges  of  the 
court  of  appeals,  with  whom  he  studied  law;  for  three  years  was 
a  law  partner  of  his  uncle,  the  present  Chief  Justice  Maulsby;  at 
the  end  of  this  time  he  went  to  the  West,  practicing  law  in  Chi- 
cago and  Missouri.  He  returned  to  his  native  place  in  1S62,  and 
was  warmly  welcomed  by  his  legal  compeers,  among  whom  he  was 
soon  recognized  as  a  master  spirit.  He  was  elected  a  member  of 
the  State  Constitutional  Convention  in  1SG7.  As  a  lawyer  he  lias 
a  large  and  constantly  increasing  practice,  in  which  he  is  emi- 
nently successful. 

Lloyd  Loustdes.  Jr.,  a  relative  of  young  Blacks  and  the  advi- 
sary  counsel  for  the  defense,  is  one  of  the  rising  and  most  prom- 
ising young  members  of  the  western  Maryland  bar.  He  was  born 
in  Clarksburg,  "West  Virginia,  and  is  27  years  of  age;  of  agreeable 
presence,  bright,  vivacious  in  conversation,  keen  and  sagacious 
in  argument.  He  graduated  at  Alleghany  college,  Meadeville, 
Pennsylvania  ;  read  law  with  K.  L.  Ashhurst,  Esq.,  of  Philadel- 
phia, Pennsylvania,  and  attended  law  lectures  at  the  University 
of  Pennsylvania,  in  Philadelphia,  where  he  graduated  in  1867;  he 
at  once  began  the  practice  of  law  in  the  city  of  Cumberland,  Ma- 
ryland, and  in  the  ardent  and  successful  pursuit  of  professional 
duties  exhibits  ample  evidence  of  natural  talent;  and  a  thorough 
legal  and  clasic  training. 

William  M.  Price,  the  junior  counsel  in  this  case,  is  now 
2S  years  old,  having  been  born  in  August  17,  1842,  in  Marshall 
county,  West  Virginia.  He  lived  with  his  father,  William  T. 
Price,  engaging  in  agricultural  pursuits  until  he  attained  his 
majority,  when  he  began  the  study  of  law  with  Hon.  Thomas 
Perry,  of  Cumberland,  Maryland,  and  was  admitted  to  the  Alle- 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    M  KAIG,   JR.  XV 

ghany  county  bar  in  1S66.  Mr.  Price  is  known  among  the  legal 
brotherhood  of  his  State  as  a  young  man  of  decided  parts;  thor- 
oughly up  in  office  work,  a  hard  student,  with  the  faculty,  some- 
what rare  with  young  practitioners,  of  knowing  how  to  make  out 
a  strong  case  in  favor  of  his  client,  putting  his  points  well,  con- 
cisely, and  clearly. 


THE    TRIAL. 


FIRST    DAY. 

Opening  of  the  Court — Preliminary  Arrangements  for  the  Trial—Ap- 
pearance of  Distinguished  Counsel — Thr  Prisoner — Impanelling  the 
Jury— The  Remits  of  the  First  Day's  Proceedings. 

At  10  o'clock  on  Wednesday,  April  11th,  1871,  the  circuit  court  of 
Frederick  county,  Maryland,  convened  at  Frederick  City,  in  special 
term,  Cor  the  trial  of  Harry  Crawford  Black,  indicted  for  shooting  Col. 
W.  W.  McKaig,  Jr.,  for  the  reason  and  in  the  manner  set  forth  in  pre- 
ceding pages. 

Before  the  hour  designated  for  the  opening  of  the  court,  tin;  Hall  of 
Justice  was  literally  jammed  with  people,  drawn  from  all  parts  of  the 
surrounding  country  by  the  great  legal  importance  of  the  contest 
about  lo  commence.  Intense  interest  and  much  feeling,  increasing 
daily  during  the  trial,  was  exhibited  by  the  living  sea  that  surged 
about  the  aisles  and  li  led  every  available  place  for  sitting  or  standing 
within  the  structure.  Within  the  bar  "were  gathered  a  large  number 
of  the  legal  fraternity,  among  whom  were  some  of  the  leadiug  legal 
men  in  the  State,  and  in  the  crowd  were  very  many  whose  names  are 
familiar  words  in  political  current  history. 

At  precisely  10  o'clock  A.  M.,  the  three  judges  of  the  court  entered, 
and,  upon  their  taking  their  seats,  the  sheriff,  in  due  form  of  law, 
opened  the  court  for  the  trial  of  the  cause. 

The  counsel  for  the  prosecution  and  tor  the  prisoner  came  in  imme- 
diately after  the  Opening  of  the  court,  and  took  seats  at  the  tables 
provided  for  them.  Immediately  thereafter  tin-  prisoner,  attended  by 
bis  father  and  Mr.  Hiram  Bartgis,  sheriff  of  Frederick  county,  ap- 
i"  ired,  and  seated  himself  witli  his  counsel. 

At  10  o'clock  and  five  minute-.  Chief  Justice  Maulsby  inquired  it' 
both  side-  were  ready  to  proceed  with  the  ease- 
Mr.  Francis  Brengle,  for  the  prosecution,  stated  that  they  were  pre- 
pared, and  Mr.  Frederick  J.  Xelson,  on  the  part  of  the  defense,  ex- 
pressed their  readiness  to  proceed. 


2  TRIAL    OF  HARRY   CRAWFORD   CLACK 

"Mr.  Francis  Brengle,  State's  attorney  for  Frederick  county,  moved 
the  admission  to  the  bar  of  Hon.  Isaac  D.  Jones,  attorney  general  of 
Maryland,  and  Hon.  Milton  Whitney,  of  Baltimore,  counsel  for  the 
prosecution. 

Mr.  Frederick  J.  Nelson,  for  the  defense,  asked  the  admission  of 
Hon.  D.  W.  Voorhees,  of  Indiana;  Hon.  A.  K.  Syester,  of  Hagerstown, 
3L1.;  Lloyd  Lowdnes,  Esq.,  and  Mr.  Win.  M.  Price,  of  Cumberland, 
counsel  for  the  defense,  and  all  went  forward  and  took  the  oath  pre- 
scribed by  law. 

Mr.  Francis  Brengle  stated  to  the  court  that  Mr.  Whitney  had  been 
appointed  by  the  circuit  court  of  Alleghany  county  to  prosecute  this 
ca3e  in  the  name  of  the  State;  but  that,  in  the  transfer  of  the  record, 
the  fad  had  been  omitted,  and  lie  desired  to  ask  the  court  what  would 
be  its  action  in  relation  thereto. 

Chief  Justice  Maulsby  replied  that,  as  it  was  a  matter  of  record,  as 
well  as  well-known  fact,  Mr.  Whitney  would  be  recognized  as  the  rep- 
resentative of  the  State. 

Chief  Justice  Maulsby  said  that  the  trial  would  now  be  proceeded 
with,  and  directed  Mr.  Charles  Mantz,  the  clerk  of  the  court,  to  call 
the  jury.  He  immediately  called  from  the  panel  twelve  jurors,  who 
took  their  places  as  called  in  the  jury  box.  He  then  turned  to  the 
prisoner,  and  in  a  deep,  solemn  voice,  said  :  "Harry  Crawford  Black, 
these  men  that  are  last  called  are  to  pass  between  the  State  of  Mary- 
laud  and  yourself  on  your  trial  for  murder ;  if,  therefore,  you  would 
challenge  them,  or  either  of  them,  you  will  do  so  when  they  come  to 
the  book  to  be  sworn,  and  you  shall  be  heard/' 

Hon.  Isaac  D.  Jones,  attorney  general  of  Maryland,  for  the  prose- 
cution, stated  that  when  the  case  was  called  at  Cumberland,  the  prose- 
cution framed  the  following  questions,  to  be  propounded  to  the  jurors 
when  called,  and  submitted  them  to  the  defense,  who  accepted  them 
at  that  time,  but  he  understood  that  their  friends  for  the  defense  now 
objected  to  them.  Ee  would,  he  said,  therefore,  submit  them  to  the 
court  for  whatever  action  they  might  deem  proper  : 

1st.  Have  you  formed  any  opinion  as  to  the  guilt  or  innocence  of  the 
prisoner  at  the  bar? 

2d.  Upon  what  was  that  opinion  formed — common  reports,  news- 
paper statements,  or  from  what  other  information? 

3d  Have  you  heard  anything  in  regard  to  this  case  from  any  person 
interested  in  the  trial ;  if  so,  under  what  circumstance.-? 

lib.  Have  you  any  bias  or  prejudice  in  your  mind  for  or  against  the 
prisoner? 

5th.  Would  anything  that  you  may  have  heard  in  regard  to  this 
case  have  any  influence  on  your  mind  to  prevent  you  from  finding  a 
verdict,  according  to  the  law  or  the  evidence,  as  it  may  be  given  in  on 
the  trial  ? 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    M  KAIG,   JR.  3 

fill),  Have  you  any  conscientious  scruples  upon  the  subject  of  capi- 
tal punishment;  if  so,  of  what  nature? 

Frederick  J.  Nelson,  on  the  part  of  the  prisoner,  said  that  it  had 
always  been  the  practice  of  this  court  to  inquire  no  further  than — had 
the  juror  any  conscientious  scruples  in  regard  to  capital  punishment, 
or  had  he  formed  or  expressed  an  opinion  as  to  the  guilt  or  innocence 
of  the  prisoner  at  the  bar?  He  saw  no  reason  why,  in  this  case,  a.  de- 
parture from  the  old  rule  should  be  made.  In  Alleghany  county  the 
circumstances  were  different ;  there  the  act  was  committed,  and  the 
people  were  enlisted  either  on  one  side  or  the  other,  and  it  was  neces- 
sary thus  to  inquire,  in  order  to  obtain  a  jury,  which  was  not  the  ne- 
cessity here,  lie  contended  that  the  regular  practice  of  the  court  was 
sufficient  to  meet  the  cuds  of  justice. 

Chief  Justice  Maulsby  said  that  the  proper  time  to  make  the  objec- 
tion would  be  when  the  juror  is  interrogated  as  the  State  wishes,  and 
that  it  would  render  no  decision  until  then  ;  but  there  was  no  evident 
reason  why  more  than  the  usual  questions  should  be  propounded  to 
the  jurors,  and  the  court  would  pursue  the  accustomed  coarse. 

David  Arnold  was  the  first  name  called. 

The  court  propounded  the  usual  interrogatories;  "Have  you  any 
conscientious  scruples  about  capital  punishment?"  "Have  you 
formed  or  expressed  an  opinion  as  to  the  guilt  or  innocence  of  the 
prisoner  at  the.  bar?"  To  which  he.  promptly  replied,  "No."  Mr. 
Voorhees  looked  into  the  face  of  the  juror  with  a  steady  gaze  for  sev- 
eral minutes,  as  did  Black,  the  prisoner,  as  if  endeavoring  to  divine  his 
thoughts.  A  short  consultation  was  held  among  counsel,  when  Arnold 
was  challenged  by  Mr.  Nelson,  for  defense. 

Wm.  II.  Boetler  was  next  called,  whereupon,  Judge  Lynch  re- 
marked that  Mr.  Boeder's  brother,  Dr.  Boetler,  of  MicldletOwn,  was 
married  to  a  cousin  of  Col.  McXaig's  widow.  The  counsel  for  the 
prisoner  then  asked  that  Mr.  Boetler  be  excused  from  serving  on  the 
jury,  to  which  the  State  interposed  objections.  The  court  decided 
that  the  objections  must  be  sustained,  ami  propounded  the  same  inter- 
rogatories made  to  Mr.  Arnold,  to  which  the  same  reply  was  given. 
Again  Mi-.  Voorhees  tried  to  read  the  juror,  and  another  consultation 
was  held,  when,  on  its  conclusion,  Mr.  Nelson  caustically  said,  "Chal- 
lenged." 

John  A.  Kramer  was  next  called  ;  challenged  by  Mr.  Nelson.  Wm. 
M.  Feaga  was  the  fourth  man  called.  He  was  accepted  and  sworn  as 
(!;  ■  foreman  ol  the  jury.  The  clerk  called  the  names  of  I  b  i  remaining 
jurors  drawn,  eacu  being  interrogated  as  above  ;  and  oul  of  the  whole 
ilar  panel  nine  were  accepted  arid  swornasjuroi  .  eighf  were  chal- 
lenged peremptorily   bj   the  d  four  were  excused  on  accounl 


4  TRIAL    OP   HARRY    CRAWFORD   BLACK 

of  sickness,  and  three  declared   incompetenl   on   accout  of  having 

formed  and  expressed  opinions  regarding  the  guilt  or  innocence  of  the 
prisoner. 

Mr.  Francis  Brengle  staled  that,  as  the  regular  panel  was  ex- 
hausted, he  would  ask  the  Court  to  draw  from  the  box  the  names 
necessary  to  complete  the  panel,  instead  of  directing  the  sheriff  to 
summon  talesmen  from  the  city,  as  usual.  Tie  said  that  he  believed 
the  purposes  of  justice  would  be  better  served  were  such  a  course  to  be 
pursued. 

Chief  Justice  Maulsby  stated  that  they  would  draw  from  the  box  the 
names  necessary  to  complete  the  panel  ;  eighteen  names  were  then 
drawn  out. 

Chief  Justice  Maulsby  asked  the  counsel  if  the  sheriff  could  not 
summon  and  bring  into  court  those  drawn  who  lived  in  the  city,  and 
if  they  failed  to  obtain  a  jury  from  them,  then  to  summon  those  drawn 
from  the  country. 

Mr.  Nelson,  for  the  defense,  said  that  they  should  require  all  drawn 
to  be  brought  into  court  before  proceeding. 

The  court  then,  at  1  o'clock  and  15  minutes,  adjourned  until 
Wednesday,  at  9  o'clock  A.  M. 


SECOND  DAY. 

The  Jury  Completed — Beading  of  the  Indictment — Opening  Statement 
by  Attorney  Genercd  Jones  for  the  Prosecution — Witnesses  for  the 
Prosecution  Sworn — Interesting  Testimony  as  to  the  Killing. 

Promptly  at  9  o'clock  a.  m.,  April  12th,  the  court  assembled  for 
the  second  day's  proceedings  in  the  caseof  Harry  Crawford  Black, 
indicted  for  killing  Col.  W.  W.  McKaig,  Jr.  Immediately  upon 
the  assembling  of  the  court  Cliief  Justice  Maulsby  stated  that  the 
sheriff  informed  him  that  seventeen  out  of  the  eighteen  gentlemen 
whose  names  were  drawn  from  the  box  yesterday  had  been  sum- 
moned, and  were  present  in  the  court-room,  and  he  desired  to  ask 
the  defense  if  they  were  willing  to  proceed  before  the  one  absent 
could  be  brought  in. 

Mr.  Nelson,  for  the  defense,  replied  that  they  would  go  on. 

The  clerk  then  called  to  the  boxtwelveof  the  jurors  drawn  ;  out 
of  these,  seven  were  challenged  by  the  defense,  two  were  declared 
incompetent,  three  being  accepted  and  sworn.  At  fifteen  minutes 
after  10  o'clock  the  jury  was  declared  complete,  and  the  following 


FOR   KILLING   COLONEL   W.   W.    M  KAIG,   JR.  5 

are  the  names  of  the  panel,  and  the  order  in  which  they  were 
sworn  : 

William  M.  Feaga,  Joseph  TV.  Etzler,  Ephraim  Stoner,  George 
TV.  Foreman,  Henry  T.  Denver,  Robert  Lease,  Potti'nger  Dorsey, 
Benjamin  P.  Crampton,  Jonathan  Biser,  George  II.  Fox,  Micheal 
Zimmerman,  and  Daniel  T.  Whip. 

After  the  jury  was  announced  complete,  the  clerk  arose,  amid 
profound  silence,  and  said  :  "Harry  Crawford  Black,  hold  up  your 
hand."  lie  then  proceeded  to  read  the  indictment  found  against 
him  by  the  grand  jury  of  Alleghany  county  for  the  murder  of  TV. 
W.  McKaig,  Jr.,  on  the  17th  day  of  October  last,  in  the  city  of 
Cumberland,  closing  with  the  question,  "What  say  yon,  guilty  or 
not  guilty  ?  "    To  which  Black  made  answer,  "Not  guilty." 

During  the  reading  of  the  indictment  the  prisoner  listened  with 
marked  attention,  hardly  taking  his  eyes  off  the  clerk  during  the 
entire  period.  There  were  three  counts  in  the  indictment,  charg- 
ing murder  in  the  first  degree,  murder  in  the  second  degree,  and 
manslaughter.  The  clerk  completed  the  reading  of  the  charge  at 
half-past  10  o'clock,  and  immediately  the  names  of  the  witnesses 
for  the  prosecution,  one  hundred  and  forty  in  number,  were  called. 

Attorney  General  Jones,  for  the  prosecution,  arose  and  made  a 
lengthy  statement  to  the  jury  of  the  points  relied  upon  by  the 
prosecution  to  make  their  case,  explaining  why  he  appeared  be- 
fore them  as  counsel  in  this  case.  He  stated  that  by  a  recent  law 
it  had  become  his  duty,  as  attorney  general  of  the  State,  to  assist 
the  State's  attorney  of  any  county  in  the  prosecution  or  defense 
of  cases  where  the  interests  of  the  State  were  involved,  whenever 
application  be  made,  to  him  ;  and  as  he  had  been  requested  by  the 
attorneys  of  both  Alleghany  and  Frederick  counties  to  assist  in 
this  case  he  had  no  alternative  but  to  appear.  He  then  referred 
to  the  indictment,  read  and  explained  the  meaning  of  the  different 
((Hints,  and  cited  to  the  jury  the  law  which  was  to  govern  this  case. 

Hon.  A.  K.  Syester,  for  the  defense,  stated  that  they  would  re- 
serve their  opening  statement  until  the  prosecution  had  closed 
their  testimony. 

Chief  Justice  Maulsby,  at  forty-five  minutes  after  It  o'clock, 
directed  the  prosecution  to  call  its  witnesses. 

Dr.  P.  A.  Healey  was  the  first  witness  placed  upon  the  stand, 
Mr.  Whitney  conducting  the  examination  for  the  prosecution. 
He  test  ifled  as  follows :  f  reside  in  Cumberland,  Alleghany  county, 
Maryland,  aud  am  a  practicing  physician  there;  myotflceis  on 

Baltimore  street,  opposite  where  the   murder  was  committed ; 
Baltimore  street  runs  east  and  west ;  I  was  acquainted  with  both 


6  HAL    OF   HARRY   CRAWFORD   BLACK 

McKaig  (deceased)  and  Black,  (the  prisoner.)  Mr.  McKaig  re- 
sided on  (lie  west  side  of  the  creek  running  through  Cumberland, 
and  cutting  Baltimore  si  reel  at  right  angles  :  he  had  to  come  east 
to  his  place  of  business;  had  a  foundry,  which  is  situated  on  the. 
easl  side  of  the  creek,  several  sq\iares  distant  from  his  dwelling, 
and  to  get  1  >  his  foundry  from  his  home  was  compelled  to  cross  r 
bridge  over  t  he  creek  ;  my  office  is  on  the  south  side  of  the  si  reet. 
and  the  place  where  the  tragedy  occurred  was  on  the  north  gideof 
the  same  street,  directly  opposite ;  I  was  near  the  window -if  my 
residence  adjoining  my  office  door,  and  I  saw  Mr.  McKaig  cross 
the  bridge,  which  is  only  a  short  distance  from  where  I  was  stand- 
ing, about  8  o'clock  on  the  morning  of  the  17th  of  October  last; 
just  as  he  crossed  the  bridge  he  passed  from  the  nor!  h  side  to  the 
south  side  of  Baltimore  street,  and  passed  my  office;  I  saw  Mr 
Black  at  the  same  time  at  the  drug  store  corner  of  Mechanics  and 
Baltimore  streets,  and  opposite  from  where  T  stood,  coming  up ; 
Black  and  McKaig  met  near  the  comer;  thestreet  is  about  thirty 
feet  wide:  I  saw  the  shooting;  when  they  were  about  to  meet  Black 
shot  McKaig;  lie  threw  up  both  hands,  and  staggered  into 
and  across  the  street;  Black  followed,  shooting  four  times; 
after  McKaig  got  into  the  street  lie  was  shot  ;  then,  as  he  stag- 
gered to  a  sign-post  on  the  opposite  side  of  thestreet,  was  shol 
again  ;  lie  then  reeled  into  the  middle  of  the  street,  and  as  he  was 
falling  Black  shot  him  again ;  Black  then  walked  past  the  body 
across  the  street  to  the  sidewalk  ;  could  not  tell  whether  he  saw  a 
pistol  or  not,  he  was  alarmed;  Dr.  Smith  and  others  brought 
McKaig  into  the  office  of  witness;  he  was  dead;  witness  went 
away,  and  never  saw  deceased  afterwards. 

Cross-examined  by  Mr.  Syestei;,  for  the  defense: 

McKaig  crossed  the.  street  at  the  end  of  the  bridge  to  the  side 
upon  which  Black  was ;  there  are  at  that  place  no  regular  stepping- 
stones  ;  I  saw  Black  at  the  drug  store  ;  Black  was  advancing ;  the 
foundry  is  in  Centre  street,  and  Mr.  McKaig  must  cross  Liberty 
street  to  reach  it ;  the  gentlemen  were  about  ten  feet  apart  when 
the  lirst  shot  was  tired  ;  saw  no  pistol  excepting  in  the  otlice  after 
the  murder  ;  the  discharges  were  not  in  rapid  succession. 

Mr.  Syester.  Did  you  hear  them  say  anything  at  any  time  dur- 
ing or  after  the  shooting  ? 

Mr.  Whitney  objected  to  the  question,  saying  that  the  question 
was  in  the  nature  of  a  question  in  chief,  and  not  in  the  nature  of 
cross-examination,  and  was  not  introduced  at  the  proper  stage; 
the  legal  point  he  made  being  that  the  cross-examiners  had  no 
right  to  question  beyond  where  they  (the  prosecution)  left  off; 
that  when  he  inquired  as  to  the  tiring  of  the  last  shot  his  exami- 
nation closed.  The  question  the  defense  asked  was  asking  as  to 
an  independent  fact. 

Mr.  Syester  denied  wishing  to  go  outside  of  the  examination  in 
chief,  but  simply  wanted  to  tiud  out  all  that  had  occurred,  and  be 
wished  to  find  out  whether  the  witness  had  omitted  anything  that 
had  occurred  on  that  occasion.  , 

Mr.  Whitney  replied  that  the  subject-matter  of  the  inquiry  was 
the  killing,  not  the  speaking,  aud  as  the  lips  of  one  were  sealed 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    M  KAIG,   JR.  7 

in  death,  it  was  what  Black  said  after  the  killing  that  was  desired 
by  the  defense. 

By  Chief  Justice  Maulsby  : 

How  long  after  the  first  shot  was  fired  did  yon  hear  anything 
said  ? 

Dr.  ITealy.  Tt  was  after  Black  had  crossed  over  to  the  pave- 
ment, perhaps  five  or  six  steps. 

Chief  Justice  Maulsby.  Was  he  walking  rapidly? 

Dr.  Hkaly.  Not  very. 

The  Chief  Justice  decided  that  as  the  words  were  used  imme- 
diately alter  the  shooting,  they  could  be  taken  as  part  of  the  cir- 
cumstances attendant  upon  that  act,  and,  as  such,  are  subject  for 
cross-examination. 

Judge  Lynch  dissented,  giving  his  opinion  that  the  speaking 
formed  a  distinct  act  from  tlio  shooting,  and,  as  such,  not  allow- 
able in  cross-examination. 

By  Mr.  Syester  : 

Will  you  state  now,  Doctor,  what  Black  said  when  he  reached 
1  he  pavement. 

Dr.  IIealy.  ITe  stood  onthe  pavement  shaking  his  pistol  toward 
thebod)  ;  Dr.  Smith.,  who  was  bending  over  it,  said  :  "Don't  shoot!" 
Black  said :  l'  That  is  w  hat  you  get  for  ruining  my  sister,  and  try- 
ing to  put  my  father  in  the  penitentiary,  and  I  have  still  got  a 
shot  for  any  d — -d  scoundrel  who  says  I  did  wrong." 

Mr.  George  H.  Gross  was  next  called,  (a  witness  for  the  prose- 
cution.) he  testified  as  follows  :  1  live  in  Cumberland  ;  my  place  of 
business  isabout  sixty  feel  from  where  the  tragedy  took  place  ;  fam 
a  tinner  in  the  house  of  Mr.  Moorehead,  on  Baltimore  street ;  I 
was  at  the  store  the  morning  of  the  occurrence;  was  at  the  win- 
dow.and  looked  in  the  d'roction  others  were  looking  ;  thefirst  thing 
l  saw  wa  i  t  he  flash  of  Black's  pistol,  and  then  saw  McKaig  throw 
up  his  hands  and  run  towards  the  middle  of  the  street ;  could  not 
tell  the  relative  positions  of  Black  and  McKaig;  saw  McKaig  when 
killed  ;  did  not  go  to  the  body  ;  saw  the  pistol  in  the  hands  of  Black 
aft  er  t  he  first  shut. 

.Mr.  Whitney  showed  a  pistol,  and  asked  if  the  witness  could 
identity  it.  Witness  could  not.  [The  pistol  was  a  Remington, 
Six-barrelled,  army  size,  self-cocking.     One  load  was  still  in  it.] 

( Iross-examined  for  the  defense  by  Mr.  Syester  : 

Was  looking  out  the  window;  saw  people  below  excited;  saw 
the  flash  Of  the  pistol,  and  then  saw  McKaig  ;  wlien  McKaig  was 
in  the  middle  Of  the  street  the  second  shot  was  fired;  they  were 
about  four  feet  apart  at  the  tirst  fire;  did  not  recognize  either 
Clack  or  McKaig  before  the  shot  was  fired  ;  did  not  see  any  wea- 
pon in  McKaig's  band. 

By  Mr.  Whitney,  for  the  prosecution  : 

Q.  Did  you  see  anything  in  McKaig'-s  hand? — A.  Nothing. 
fir.  Whitney.  Q.    How  long  after  the  iirst  Hash  did  you  see 
McKaig  throw  up  his  hand? — A.  About  a  second. 


8  TRIAL    Or    HARRY    CRAWFORD    ELACK 

Mr.  W.  W.  McKaig,  Srn  was  sworn. 

By  Mr.  "Whitney  : 

Q.  Ave  you  the  father  of  the  deceased? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  Give  us  the  date  of  his  death. —A.  The  17th  of  October  last. 

Q.  Look  at  these  clothes,  and  see  if  they  are  those  worn  liy  him 
on  the  day  of  his  death. — A.  They  are.  [The  clothes  were  a  dark 
bluish-looking  coat  and  a  white  shirt,  both  having  the  bullet  holes 
in  them.] 

Dr.  Edward  P.  Duval  was  next  called  for  the  prosecution,  and 
testified:  I  live  in  Cumberland,  Maryland ;  am  a  practicing  phy- 
sician there;  made  an  examination  of  the  body  of  W,  \v.  McKaig 
after  he  waekilled;  probed  the  three  wounds;  found  the  first  was  in 
the  left  side,  between  the  seventh  and  eighth  ribs,  the  second 
wound  w: 'S  about  an  inch  and  a  half  above  tlie  lower  angle  of  the 
shoulder  hlade,  the  third  ball  entered  the  left  side  near  the  bark- 
bone,  and  penetrated  forward  ;  extracted  the  ball  of  thefirst  wound, 
its  direction  was  downward,  inward,  and  forward;  the  deceased 
must  have  had  his  side  to  the  person  who  shot  him  ;  extracted  the 
ball  in  front  of  the  lower  part  of  the  breast  bone;  its  direction  was 
forward,  and  slightly  downward  and  inward  ;  the  direction  of  the 
third  ball  was  slightly  upward.  [The  witness  exhibited  the  two 
balls  extracted  by  him,  and  they  were  shown  to  the  jury.l  The 
effect  of  a  shot  is  to  create  depression  and  exhaustion  :  a  ball  pene- 
trating the  chest  or  diaphragm  may  occasion  spasmodic  action  ;  a 
ball  entering  the  side  wouid  give  a  shock  both  to  the  mind  and 
body;  either  one  of  the  shots  received  would  rave  caused  the  death 
o!  McKaig;  lie  examined  the  body  at  the  residence  of  the  father 
of  the  decease  d ;  be  only  made  a  casual  examination  at  the  ollice. 

Cross-examined  by  Mr.  Nelson,  for  the  defense  : 

Witness  made  no  examination  of  the  clothing  ;  does  not  pretend 
to  he  an  expeit ;  might  tell  by  the  impingement  of  a  ball  upon  the 
clothing,  if  there  were  successive  layers  what  direction  it  came 
from  ;  there  was  no  difficulty  in  discovering  the  course  of  the  balls 
in  McKaig's  body;  thinks  one  of  the  balls  struck  the  edge  of  a 
rib,  from  its  jagged  appearance;  theball  fired  into  the  back  lodged 
in  the  spinal  ma. row  ;  felt  satistied  of  that ;  he  examined  the  body 
about  tluee-quarters  of  an  hour  alter  the  body  was  taken  into  the 
ollice  ;  only  probed  the  wounds;  made  no  post  mortem  examination ; 
had  been  summoned  by  tue  coroner,  and  the  jury  rendered  their 
verdict  without  a  minute  examination. 

James  Orrick,  Jr..  was  next  called  for  the  prosecution,  and  tes- 
tified as.  follows :  I  reside  in  Cumberland;  I  live  between  Balti- 
more street  and  the  foundry  of  W.  W.  McKaig,  .Jr.  ;  I  recollect 
the  morning  of  the  killing  of  McKaig  ;  I  saw  Black  the  morning 
of  the  shooting  ;  I  had  my  watch  in  my  hand  15  minutes  before  8 
O'clock,  and  it,  was  about  that  time  I  saw  Black;  he  was  looking 
in  at  the  ollice  windows  of  the  foundry  of  McKaig, slowly  walking 
upon  the  opposite  side  of  the  street  and  looking  in;  he  walked 
faster  after  passing  the  foundry ;  I  got  into  Baltimore  street  lirst ; 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    m'kAIG,   JR.  9 

I  went  up  the  street  toward  the  railroad  ;  T  saw  nothing  of  the 
shooting  ;  it  was  a  warm  morning;  he  (Black)  had  a  large  brown 
overcoat  on  and  both  bands  in  his  pockets. 
The  cross-examination  did  not  change  the  tenor  of  the  evidence. 

John  8.  Craigen,  for  the  prosecution,  was  called,  and  testified  as 
follows  :  I  reside  in  Cumberland  ;  I  am  a  druggistat  southeast  cor- 
ner of  Baltimore  and  Mechanics  streets  ;  I  remember  the  morning 
of  the  killing  of  McKaig;  I  saw  Black  before  the  shooting;  it  was 
a  mild  morning;  I  saw  Black  on  the  opposite  side  of  the  street 
from  my  store;  lie  seemed  to  be  looking  over  the  creek  at  West 
Baltimore  street  ;  he  had  on  a  dark  overcoat;  he  had  his  hands,  I 
think,  in  his  pockets;  it  was  at  least  half  an  hour  before  the  shoot- 
in?. 

The  cross-examination  did  not  develope  any  new  facts. 

Cornelius  Conner  was  called  for  the  prosecution,  and  testified  as 
follows  :  I  am  a  drayman  and  live  in  Cumberland  ;  I  knew  the  de- 
ceased. Col.  W.  \Y.  McKaig,  Jr.  ;  I  saw  him  the  morning  of  the 
occurrence;  he  spoke  to  me  and  I  replied  ;  I  went  into  a  store  to 
get  a  drink  of  water,  and  when  I  came  out  he  was  laying  in  the 
street  on  his  lace;  I  met  him  at  1  lie  endof  the  bridge  when  I  spoke 
to  him  ;  the  shooting  was  all  over  when  J  came  our ;  1  don't  think 
I  could  describe  the  pistol ;  I  did  not  jro  to  the  body,  but  went  im- 
mediately to  the  foundry  with  the  news. 

The  cross-examination  did  not  alter  the  effect  of  the  state- 
ments. 

Chief  Justice  Maulsby  stated  that  the  Court  desired  to  admon- 
ish the  jury  not  to  read  any  newspaper  accounts  of  the  trial,  or  to 
allow  any  one  to  talk  to  them,  or  in  their  presence,  of  the  trial. 

At  2  o'clock  and  SO  minutes  the  court  adjourned  until  Thursday 
morning  at  9  o'clock. 


TIITRD  DAY. 

The  Prosecution  Close  their  Case — Opening  Statement  for  the  Defense 
by  Mr.  Syester — Witnesses  for  the  Treiverser  upon  the  Stand — 
Their  Version  of  the  Tragedy. 

Even  before  the  hour  appointed  for  opening  court,  the  knots  of 
people  gathered  about  hotel  porticos  and  street  corners,  began  to 
breakup;  individuals  and  parties  wended  their  way  toward  the 
court-house. 

At  precisely  9  o'clock  on  Thursday,  April  13,  the  court  assem- 
bled for  the  t  bird  day's  proceedings  in  the  case.  The  apartment 
presented  the  same  animated  appearance  as  on  each  of  the  pre- 
ceding days;  in  fact,  the  interest  was  very  palpably  increasing.  ' 


10  TRIAL    OF    HARRY   CRAWFORD   BLACK 

Judges  Maulsby,  Lynch,  and  Bowie  were  present.  Soon  after 
the  opening  of  the  court  the  prisoner  entered,  accompanied  by  his 
mother.  Mrs.  Black  was  dressed  in  deep  mourning,  ;md  all  the 
time  while  in  court  seemed  to  be  greatly  agitated. 

Cool;  Ekgkey,  for  the  prosecution,  was  called  and  testified  as 
follows:  I  reside  in  Cumberland,  Alleghany  county,  Maryland;  I 
have  resided  there  live  years,  and  was  there  in  October  last;  am 
an  attorn  ey-at-law;  1  was  acquainted  with  both  the  prisoner  at 
the  bar  and  W.  W.  McKaig,  Jr.;  I  have  known  the  prisoner  two 
or  three  years:  i  remember  the  day  McKaig  was  killed;  I  saw 
Black  (in  thai  day  as  I  was  passing  to  my  office  about  half-past 
7  o'clock  in  the  morning,  before  the  shooting  lie  was  standing 
within  the  door  of  the  drug  store  of  C.  C.  Shriver;  L  passed  by  a 
short  distance,  then  returned  and  shook  hands  with  him  at  the 
door,  bidding  him  good  morning,  and  informed  him  that  I  was 
under  many  obligations  to  him  for  escorting  my  mother  from 
Cumberland  to  Baltimore;  Black  replied  that  he  was  glad  to  have 
done  me  the  favor;  as  1  bade  him  good  morning  Black  stepped 
back  further  into  the  recess  of  Shriver's  store;  he  had  an  over- 
coat on  and  wore  a  slouch  hat,  and  had  both  hands  in  his  overcoat 
pockets,  when  I  first  approached  him;  he  offered  me  his  left  hand 
and  did  not  disengage  his  right  hand  whilst  I  was  talking  with 
him;  his  right  pocket  seemed  to  be  pushed  out;  I  thought  there 
was  something  more  than  his  hand  alone  in  it,  and  thought  it  so 
strange  that  he  should  give  me  his  left  hand,  not  being  very  inti- 
mate with  him;  after  I  bade  him  good  morning  I  passed  over  to 
my  office;  1  reside,  on  Bedford  street,  on  east  side  of  Willis  creek, 
about  tour  squares  from  Baltimore  street;  Shriver's  store  is  on 
Baltimore  street,  not  quite  hall-way  between  Willis  creek  and  the 
Baltimore  depot,  and  east  of  Mechanics  street. 

Cross-examined  by  Mr.  Syester: 

I  had  passed  Black  standing  in  the  drug  store,  and,  not  clearly 
recognizing  him,  i  asked  Mr.  Wickerd,  whom  I  met  a  few  steps 
below,  '"  [snot  that  young  Black?"  and  on  his  replying  "Yes," 
f  went  hack  and  met  Black  just  as  he  stepped  from  .Shriver's  store 
door  to  the  pavement,  and  I  said  "Good  morning,  Mr.  Black;" 
my  eyesight  is  good ;  I  supposed  there  was  something  in  his  pocket, 
because  he  extended  me  his  left  hand  and  brokeawayin  an  abrupt 
manner;  ]  know  Black  was  agent  for  a  coal  company;  but  do  not 
know  his  business  at  Cumberland  on  that  day. 

Attorney  General  Jones  stated  that  the  (State  would  here  rest 
its  case  and  would  offer  no  further  evidence,  except  for  the  pur- 
pose of  rebutting  the  testimony  offered  by  the  defense. 

[At  this  juncture.the  interest  become  intense,  people  began  to 
crowd  into  the  court  room  in  large  numbers,  and  many  were 
unable  to  gain  admittance.  All  the  facts  of  the  killing,  as  proved 
by  the  prosecution,  had  been  spread  before  the  public  in  the  news- 
papers, and  nothing  new  had  yet  been  heard;  but  what  would  be 
the  evidence  of  the  defense  was  a  mystery  to  all,  and  it  was 


FOB    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    \V.    M'KAIG,    JR.  11 

expected  the  opening  statemenl  would  develope  the  facts  upon 
which  they  would  rely  for  an  acquittal  of  the  prisoner,  and  in  the 
hands  of  Mr.  Syester,  all  knew  that  they  would  be  eloquently  and 
forcibly  staled.] 

At  10  o'clock  and  8  minutes  Mr.  Syester  arose  and  made  the  fol- 
lowing 

OPENING  STATEMENT  FOR  THE  DEFENSE. 

The  transaction  out  of  which  the  indictment  in  this  case  grew 
occurred  in  Alleghany  county,  Maryland,  more  than  one  hundred 
miles  distant  from  here.  And  yet  we  find  ourselves  confronted 
by  you,  as  those  to  pass  between  the  state  and  the  life  of  the 
prisoner — strangers  to  him  and  to  his  witnesses. 

"  That  the  trial  of  tacts  where  they  arise  is  one  of  the  greatest 
securities  to  the  lives,  liberties,  and  estates  of  the  people,"  isa 
great  truth  that  was  declared,  centuries  ago,  in  the  faoeof  that 
tremendous  engine  of  power  and  oppression,  the  star  Chamber 
of  England,  and  it  is  deeply  embedded  in  the  hearts  and  affections 
Of  all  who  value  the  rights  and  liberties  of  the  people. 

It  stands  incorporated  to-day  in  the  present  constitution  of 
our  State,  as  it  has  stood  for  near  a  century  in  all  its  several 
constitutions,  unmoved  amid  the  fluctuations  of  power,  unchanged 
amid  the  changes  and  revolutions  of  sentiment  that  have  marked 
the  history  of  this  State  from  its  earliest  foundation. 

The  prisoner  has  been  dragged  away  from  the  face  of  the  com- 
munity before  which  he  has  gone  in  and  out  from  his  earliest 
boyhood  without  reproach,  lie  has  been  torn  from  those  who 
understood  and  appreciated  the  high  character  he  so  early  won 
among  them,  and  u  it  h  his  witnesses,  all  strangers  to  you,  is  before 
you,  at  the  mere  suggestion  of  the  state  attorney.  And  you  are 
called  on  by  the  prosecution,  which  has  dragged  him  here,  to 
declare  by  your  verdict  that  he  shall  not  live,  but  must  die. 

Gentlemen,  be  your  verdict  what  it  may,  whether  it  shall  shut 
up  and  conclude  that  young  life,  while  the  dews  of  the  morning 
are  yet  fresh  upon  his  brow,  in  the  solemn  silence  of  the  grave,  or 
shall  again  re  stoic  him  to  the  life  of  usefulness,  honor,  and 
respectability  upon  which  he  had  just  entered,  and  return  him 
once  more  to  the  arms  and  affections  of  his  wretched  father  and 
heart-broken  mother— whatever  may  be  the  end  of  this  business, 
let  it  ever  be  remembered  that  Harry  Crawford  Black  never 
shunned  the  face  of  his  people,  never  shrank  from  an  investiga- 
tion of  this  transact  ion  at  the  place  where  it  arose,  but  that,  he 
has  been  brought  here  by  this  prosecution  to  take  his  chances  for 
justice  and  for  his  life  before  strangers. 

The  circumstances  that  led  to  the  occurrence  for  which  the 
prisoner  is  here  to  answer  with  his  life  are  the  most  distressing 
and  the  very  saddest  that  can  be  imagined,  in  order  fully  to  un- 
derstand them  it  will  be  necessary  to  go  back  a  few  years  prior  to 
the  particular  matter  we  are  inquiring  into. 

[n  1863  the  prisoner,  then  a  mere  boy,  not  seventeen  years  of 
age,  left  his  home  and  became  a  soldier  in  the  ranks  of  the  South- 
ern army. 


12  TRIAL    OF   HARRY   C&AWFORD    BLACK 

His  family  consisted  only  of  his  father  and  mother  and  one 
sister,  Myra  II.  Black,  not  then  over  twenty  years  of  age. 

The  deceased,  William  W.  McKaig,  Jr.,  wasalso  a  soldier  in  the 
same  service;  and  upon  the  close  of  the  war,  in  1865.  these  two,  with 
others,  returned  to  their  bomes  in  Cumberland,  Maryland.  But 
the  fortunes  and  worldly  i  xpectations  of  these  two,  to  which  they 
returned,  were  as  widely  different  as  the  poles.  McKaig  returned 
to  the  bosom  of  an  opulent  and  powerful  family,  and  Black  to 
the  arms  of  one  straitened  in  fortune  and  almost  wholly  without 
means. 

Findin.se  all  the  avenues  of  trade  already  filled  in  his  native 
town,  and  being  obliged  to  do  something  for  a  iivelihood,  he 
accordingly  took  service  a  few  weeks  after  he  returned  home  in  a 
corps  of  engineers  for  service  under  Maximillian,  then  Emneror 
of  Mexico.  Here  he  remained  until  the  death  of  Maximillian, 
which  put  an  end  to  that  employment,  and  he  returned  to  Cum- 
berland in  June.  18G6. 

He  remained  but  a  very  short  time  and  went  West,  where  he 
obtained  employment;  but,  by  the  misfortunes  of  his  employers, 
lost  his  situation,  and  returned  to  Cumberland  sometime  in  the 
early  part  of  1867.  Again  he  left  Cumberland  for  the  West,  and 
again  returned  in  September,  1S69.  At  this  time,  through  the 
influence  of  friends,  he  obtained  employment  in  the  Franklin 
Coal  Company,  engaged  in  mining,  where  he  remained  in  the  per- 
sonal supervision  of  the  business  entrusted  to  him  until  October, 
1870.  when  the  occurrences  that  form  the  subject  of  your  inquiry 
happened,  and  he  surrendered  himself  to  the  sheriff  of  Alleghany 
county.     He  has  been  in  confinement  from  that  day  to  this. 

I  should  here  state  tint  during  the  whole  period  of  his  confine- 
ment his  relations  with  the  company  he  served  were  in  no  resoect 
changed,  except  so  far  as  his  personal  attention  to  the  affairs 
committed  to  his  hands  was  concerned.  He  still  continues  to 
sign  and  endorse  all  the  necessary  papers,  statements  and  rolls 
connected  with  the  department  under  his  supervision  in  prison. 

lu  the  spring  and  summer  of  1866,  as  I  have  stated,  Black  was 
in  Mexico. 

William  McKaig  was  in  Cumberland— a  gentleman  of  powerful 
person,  of  uncommon  appearance,  and  elegant  accomplishments. 
He  knew  Myra  Black,  the  sister  of  the  prisoner,  from  her  child- 
hood, lie  left  her  for  the  war  a  mere  child;  lie  returned  to  find 
her  just  on  the  verge  of  womanhood,  with  all  its  fair  visions  and 
bright  prospects  before  her.  lie  found  her  in  the  very  "  morn 
and  liquid  deus  of  life,  when  contagious  blandishments  are  most 
imminent,"  and  seeing  this  young  and  confiding  girl,  remarkable 
for  her  sprightly  temper  and  distinguished  for  the  strength  and 
polish  of  her  intellect,  with  no  stain  upon  her  character,  no  blemish 
upon  her  name,  no  spot  upon  her  honor,  the  pride  and  solace  of 
her  parents,  he  then  conceived  the  sinful,  hideous,  and  unholy 
passion  which  terminated  in  her  ruin,  and  the  indescribable  and 
unuterable  wretchedness  of  her  parents  and  brother. 

It  will  be  proven  to  you  that  McKaig  was  constant  and  assidu- 
ous in  his  attentions  to  this  lady,  frequently  with  her  in  public, 
and  at  all  times  was  With  her,  an  acceded  and  accredited  gentle- 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL   W.    W.    m'KAIG,   JR.  13 

man.  These  attentions  were  never  once  supposed  by  the  parents 
or  any  other  relative  of  the  family  to  have  been  dishonorable,  and 
he  was,  therefore,  received  at  all  times  upon  terms  of  unhesitating 
confidence.  But  he  abused,  the  confidence  and  hospitalities  of 
these  parents  to  their  indescribable  misery  and  wretchedness,  and 
lie  betrayed  the  love  of  this  unhappy  girl,  to  her  absolute  and 
fearful  ruin.  lie  seduced  her,  and  from  that  time  forth,  she  was 
but  the  mere  creature  and  very  slave  of  his  passions  and  lusts. 
lie  was  complete  master  of  her  movements,  and  Iter  fears  of  expo- 
sure and  the  dread  of  revelations  enabled  him  to  hold  that  power 
and  exercise  it  with  remorseless  cruelty. 

He  determined  that  she  should  remain  his,  to  gratify  his  pas- 
sion and  minister  to  his  depraved  lust.  He  held  her  fast  in  his 
remorseless  grasp^  determined  that  nothing  should  withdraw  her 
from  his  power  until  satiated  with  this  unholy  indulgence;  in  his 
own  good  time  he  saw  proper  to  throw  her  back  on  the  bosom  of 
her  family,  to  be  scorned  by  herself  and  society  and  shunned  by 
the  world. 

So  inordinate  had  become  his  passion  and  so  determined  was  he 
in  holding  on  to  the  absolute  power  he  knew  he  held  over  her  that, 
when  a  gentleman  of  high  character  offered  her  his  hand  in  hon- 
orable marriage,  McKaig,  with  the  knowledge  that  it  was  his 
purpose  to  remove  to  the  far  West  with  his  intended  bride,  dis- 
closed to  him  the  dreadful  and  stunuing  fact  that  he  had  seduced 
and  ruined  her  in  the  face  of  the  world. 

In  October,  1866,  McKaig  married  a  Miss  Hughes,  of  Jefferson 
county.  Virginia.  But  his  criminal  intercourse  with  this  unhappy 
girl  continued.  His  marriage  had  no  power  to  check  or  bridle  ins 
licentiousness.  He  still  lived  with  the  wretched  and  undone 
victim  of  his  lust  until  the  spring  of  1870,  when  there  was  born 
to  her  body,  the  child  which  this  day  bears  his  image  on  its  infant 
face,  so  plain  and  unmistakable  that  there  is  no  room  for  doubt. 
Up  to  that  time  McKaig  on  all  public  occasions  and  before  the 
face  of  the  community  held  this  trembling,  ruined  girl  forth  as 
virtuous,  and  accredited  her  as  one  worthy  the  society  of  the  pure 
and  blameless  in  life.  On  the  occasion  of  his  return  home  from 
his  bridal  trip  with  his  young  wife,  a  brilliant  ami  fashionable 
reception  and  costly  entertainment  was  given  at  his  father's 
house.  And  there  this  wretched  lady  was  an  invited  and  honored 
guest.  On  that  very  occasion  McKaig,  before  the  whole  company, 
gave  her  his  arm  and  escorted  her  to  the  refreshment  room,  and 
in  other  ways  paid  her  marked  attention. 

During  all  this  time  Crawford  Black  remained  in  utter  and  pro- 
found ignorance  of  the  rum  of  his  sister,  and  the  shame  that  had 
fallen  on  his  name.  His  employments  and  engagements  were 
miles  away,  and  he  reached  his  home  only  once  in  two  or  three 
weeks  and  then  only  for  a  brief  interval,  when  he  came  to  share 
with  his  mother,  whom  be  ever  loved  with  unexampled  tender- 
ness, part  of  his  scanty  earnings  and  savings.  Indeed  it  was  not 
until  the  vigilant  eye  of  the  mother  discovered  the  situation  of 
her  daughter  that  one  thought  or  shade  of  suspicion  ever  crossed 
her  mind.  Then,  for  the  first  time,  did  these  stunned  and  stricken 
parents  even  imagine  the  possibility  ot   the  shame  of  their  only, 


14  TRIAL   OF   HARRY   CRAWFORD   BLACK 

their  darling  daughter.  And  into  i  heir  bleeding  hearts  alone  did 
that  agonized  and  wretched  girl  pour  little  by  little  the  story  of 
her  wrongs  and  ruin.  Every  precaution  was  taken  by  the  parents 
to  conceal  the  dishonor  of  their  humble  name  from  the  world,  and 
to  save  and  shield  their  erring  and  ruined  child  from  the  scorn 
and  contempt  of  the  community.  The  effect  of  tins  dreadful  dis- 
closure or  discovery  upon  the  mother  is  beyond  all  description. 
She  is  a  lady  of  superior  and  finished  education,  of  refinement  and 
unblemished  character,  keenly  and  painfully  alive  to  the  honor 
and  respectability  of  her  little  family.  Indeed,  like  a  woman  ©f 
fine  understanding  and  strong  sense,  as  she  is,  she  cared  for  little 
else.  She  was  utterly  prostrate  and  helpless  in  the  presence  of 
the  overwhelming  calamity  that  dashed  every  cup  of  life  with 
bitterness  from  her  lips  and  shrouded  all  its  scenes  with  unalter- 
able gloom  and  irredeemable  wretchedness.  Day  after  day  she 
tank  under  the  heavy  burden  and  gave  way  under  the  unendur- 
able misery  of  her  situation. 

The  no  less  wretched  father  was  summoned  to  the  contempla- 
tion of  scenes  of  anguish  and  misery  which  reduced  him  to  a  state 
of  absolute  distraction  and  frenzy.  Everything  around  him' 
bespoke  utter  and  irretrievable  ruin.  His  jiame  and  his  honor, 
the  only  things  that  remained  to  him,  were  gone,  while  everything 
around  him  was  a  memorial  of  shame.  Ilis  wife  sinking  and 
failing  before  him,  his  daughter  dishonored,  scorned,  and  driven 
from  the  face  of  the  world;  his  home  shunned  by  the  pure  and 
blameless  in  life;  his  very  name  but  the  byword  of  the  depraved 
and  licentious,  to  be  pronounced  with  scorn  and  contempt  in  all 
the  high  places  and  all  the  low  places  of  the  land,  the  standing 
stock  of  the  ribald  jest  and  the  low-born  sneer. 

It  was  while  laboring  under  influences  such  as  I  have  attempted 
to  give  you  but  a,  faint  outline,  and  goaded  to  madness  and  dis- 
traction by  the  contemplation  of  miseries  which  no  time,  do  con- 
solation could  heal,  and  of  which  he  was  a  daily  and  hourly 
spectator;  it  was  under  such  influences  and  impulses  that  he 
resolved  to  visit  the  author  of  all  this  ruin  and  woe  with  that 
vengeance,  which,  I  take  occasion  to  say  here,  he  most  richly 
deserved,  and  which  the  common  and  universal  sense  of  all  man- 
kind most  justly  and  righteously  approve. 

lie  had  a  difficulty  with  McKaig  in  the  month  of  June,  1S70,  but 
McKaigwas  not  severely  injured.  He  was  soon  on  the  streets  again 
receiving  the  congratulations  and  honeyed  commendations  which 
wealth  and  great  family  influence  can  always  command,  no  matter 
to  what  extent  the  character  maybe  depraved;  while  the,  poor,, 
scorned,  ruined  victim  of  his  passion  and  lust  sat  down,  clol  hed 
with  the  garment,  of  wretchedness,  and  her  bereaved  and  help 
parents  mingled  their  tears  and  sorrows  unseen,  uncared,  unpitied 
and  uncomtorted  by  those  who,  but  lately,  delighted  to  accept  their 
hospitalities. 

After  the  occurrence  in  June,  McKaig's  whole  manner  and 
relations  to  the  family  he  had  so  fearfully  wronged  changed,  lie 
then  came  forward  and  openly  denied  having  seduced  the  girl, 
declared  that  she  had  been  long  before,  from  her  earliest  girlhood, 
a  prostitute.    We  have  reason  to  know  that  those  who  have  in 


FOR   KILLING    COLONEL   W.    \V.    M'kAIG,   JR.  15 

charge  his  name  are  here  in  this  prosecution  to  attempt  to  show 
her  character  for  depravity,  guilt,  and  shame,  which  but  lately 
they,  as  well  as  he,  held  forth  to  the  world  as  a  til  associate  for 
the  virtuous  and  the  pureof  heart.  Nor  did  the  vengeance  of 
McKaig  stop  with  simply  branding  the  girl  he  had  ruined  as  an 
outcast  from  all  decency;  he  went  further.  Conscious  of  his  own 
superior  physical  prowess,  and  glorying  in  the  belief  and  convic- 
tion that  his  steady  hand,  his  quick  eye,  his  dauntless  courage, 
and  unerring  aim  would  supply  him  with  large  advantages  in  any 
description  of  encounter  he  might  provoke,  he  determined  to  force 
a  bloody  and  deadly  issue  upon  both  the  father  and  son  of  this 
unfortunate  girl.  ITe  immediately  began  to  browbeat  and  insult, 
this  boy  upon  all  occasions  when  opportunity  offered.  We  will 
show  you,  gent  lemen,  that  he  armed  himself  and  went  armed  with 
tlic  express  purpose  of  killing  Black  at  the  first  opportunity;  that 
when  he  was  killed  he  had  on  bis  person  no  less  than  two  six-barrel 
revolvers,  all  loaded,  and  we  expect,  gentlemen  of  the  jury,  to  show 
you  that  it  was  McKaig's  intention  to  provoke  an  attack  that  he 
might  kill  Harry  Crawford  Black.  On  several  occasions,  gentle- 
men, we  will  prove  to  you  that  McKaig  would  go  out  of  his  way 
to  offer  an  insult  to  this  prisoner,  and  we  expect  to  show  you  that, 
on  the  morning  of  the  shooting  when  Black  met  McKaig  and  crossed 
over  the  street  to  the  side  where  he  was,  he  made  up  his  mind  that 
the  time  had  come  when  McKaig  was  going  to  force  him  to  defend 
his  life,  and  I  tell  you,  gentlemen,  that,  if  he  had  not  been  suit- 
plied  with  a  self-cocking  pistol,  Black  would  himself  have  been  a 
bloody  corpse  from  the  effects  of  that  meeting.  AYe  expect  to  be 
able  to  show  that  McKaig  was  the  first  to  make  the  attack.  And 
little  did  that  proud  man  think  that  the  frail  boy  he  was  pursuing 
for  his  life  would  prove  the  winner  of  the  stake  that  he  himself 
had  laid.  That  boy  had  stood  unmoved  amid  the  shock  of  battle, 
and  been  calm  and  composed  amid  the  roar  of  artillery  and  the 
clash  of  musketry,  and  to  a  great  harvest  of  death  he  had  also 
been  a  spectator.  Driven  to  a  defense  of  his  own  life,  he  was  too 
brave  a  man  to  shirk  the  responsibility,  and  in  the  fight  he  had 
not  provoked  he  proved  the  better  man. 

Gentlemen,  our  friends  on  the  other  side  have  said  much  about 
the  degrees  of  murder;  with  those  distinctions  you  have  nothing 
to  do.  This  young  man  is  either  guiltv  or  not  guilty.  You  must 
say  either  that  his  life  shall  be  taken  or  that  he  shall  be  restored 
to  Ins  family  and  friends  fully  purged  of  the  crime  whereof  he 
stands  charged.    They  have,  gentlemen,  cited  several  passages 

from  the  law  books.  There  is  an  unwritten  law,  as  unalterable 
as  that  of  the  Modes  and  Persians,  that  is  legibly  traced  upon 
your  hearts  and  upon  mine,  and  is  as  essential  to  the  conduct  of 
tyas  that  t  rac<  d  \\  it  bin  the  legal  commentaries.  Such  a  law, 
gentlemen,  has  a  great  bearing  upon  this  case,  as  you  will  see 
when  we  offer  our  testimony. 

KVJ1>::  -■  E   FOB   THE  DEFENSE. 

Mr.  Lair,-,  tux  Wilson  was  then  called  for  the  defense,  and  inter- 
rogated as  to  seeiug  McKaig  insult  Black  a  l'<  w  days  before  the 
shooting,  evidently  for  the  purpose  of  bringing  on  a  tight. 


16  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

Mr.  Whitney,  for  the  prosecution,  objected,  and  quite  a  lengthy 
argument  took  place  between  counsel  as  to  its  admissibility.  The 
conrt  held,  however,  that  it  was  admissible,  but  Mr.  Voorhees, 
for  the  defense,  withdrew  the  witness,  stating  that  they  would 
offer  the  testimony  at  another  time. 

1/;-.  Charles  Medorc,  for  t be  defense,  was  called,  and  testified  :  I 
reside  in  Cumberland;  I  know  Mr.  McKaig  by  sight;  I  knew 
Black  personally;  I  went  to  school  with  him;  I  saw  a  good  part 
of  the  transaction  that:  resulted  in  the  killing  of  McKaig  on  the 
17th  of  October  last ;  1  was  at  work  opposite  where  the  shooting 
occurred;  r  saw  McKaig  approach  Black,  saw  Black  shoot  him, 
and  a  pistol  fall  from  McKaig'S  hands  at  the  first  lire  that  Black 
discharged  ;  this  was  followed  up  until  four  shots  had  been  fired; 
Dr.  Smith.  Mr.  Morehead,  and  I  carried  the  body  of  McKaig  into 
the  office  ;  r  saw  hut  one  pistol,  and  ir  fill  about  the  middle  of  the 
i  i  reet,  about  ten  feet  from  the  curb  ;  I  unbuckled  the  belt  around 
McKaig  in  the  office,  and  it  contained  an  empty  pistol-holster;  I 
saw  no  pistol  in  the  ofiice. 

Cross-examined  by  Mr.  Whitney  : 

It  was  between  71  and  S  o'clock  that  the  shooting  took  place;  I 
am  a  shoemaker  by  trade;  I  looked  out  the  window  when  I  beard 
the  first  shot;  it  was  a  pretty  good-sized  window,  the  panes  of 
class,  perhaps,  12x16;  I  had  not  taken  my  seat  to  work,  having 
jusl  entered  the  shop,  and  had  been  engaged  in  arranging  things 
about  the  shop,  as  was  my  custom  on  Monday  morning;  whibt 
attending  to  this  Charley  Clark,  a  young  lad  about  thirteen  or 
fourteen  years  of  age,  and  a  relative  of  mine,  had  come  in  to  have 
a  measure  for  a  pair  of  shoes  taken  ;  I  was  behind  the  counter,and 
was  just  taking  out  my  book  to  enter  the  measure,  and  my  hack 
was  to  the  door ;  the  counter  is  between  the  door  and  the  window; 
what  I  saw  was  through  the  window,  except  the  third  shot,  which  1 
saw  through  the  door;  when  I  looked  out  at  the  door  McKaig  u  as 
down  on  all-fours  near  my  door  on  the  sidewalk;  the  first  shot  1 
did  not  see,  the  second  I  turned  and  saw  through  the  window; 
when  I  first  saw  McKaig  he  was  crossing  the  street  toward  me  in 
a  kind  of  a  trot;  I  don't  think  he  (McKaig) could  have  been  more 
than  a  step  or  two  from  the  pavement  when  I  first  saw  him,  ami 
was  in  a  kind  of  a  stooping  condition,  with  revolver  in  hand  ;  it 
was  hanging  down  ;  I  do  not  recollect  seeing  hands  up  ;  there,  were 
four  shots  fired  ;  he  (McKaig)  was  crossing  the  street  when  Black 
fired  the  second  shot;  the  pistol  had  dropped  about  ten  or  fifteen 
feet  from  where  the  body  lay  after  the  first  shot ;  Black  followed 
him  up,  firing  until  four  shots  had  been  discharged;  McKaig  was 
down  on  all-tours  near  the  curb  at  my  door  ;  he  raised  and  went 
back  toward  where  the  shooting  commenced,  and  received  the 
fourth  shot  in  the  middle  of  the  street ;  I  was  about  twenty-five 
feet  from  bim,  being  at  the  door;  he  was  erect  at  the  time  of  the 
fourth  shot;  Black  was  very  close  in  frontof  him  ;  Mr.  Morehead, 
Dr.  Smith,  and  I  took  up  the  body;  1  do  not  know  whether  the 
revolver  fell  from  the  holster  ;  they  were  about  eight  or  ten  feet 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    flfKAIG,    JR.  17 

apart  when  the  first  shot  was  fired  ;  T  only  saw  where  one.  ball  hit 
hiru  ;  I  told  several  parties  T  saw  the  pistol ;  one  J  remember  was 
Mr.  McCullough;  I  do  not  remember  seeing  anything  else  in 
McKaig's  hands;  the  pistol  was  ratheralong  one;  they  are  gener- 
ally alike,  except  the  size  of  them;  I  think  it  was  longer  than 
usually  used  ;  the  pistol  was  in  his  hands  a  very  short  time,  not  a 
minute;  I  think  Ale Kaig  walked  ten  or  twelve  feet,  carrying  the 
pistol  in  his  hands  ;  I  don't  think  any  one  else  assisted  in  carrying 
the  body  except  the  ones  already  named  ;  I  opened  the  shirt  and 
saw  but  one  wound  ;  1  think  1  »r.  Smith,  Mr.  Price,  and  a  number 
of  others  were  in  the  office  whilst  the  body  lay  there:  I  unbuckled 
the  belt  from  McKaig's  body,  and  found  on  it  an  empty  pistol- 
holster. 

Ehos  Davis,  for  the  defense,  was  the  next  witness  called,  and 
testified  as  follows  :  I  live  on  Centre  street,  in  Cumberland;  have 
been  there  three  years,  and  follow  carting;  I  knew  Mr.  McKaig ; 
used  to  do  a  good  deal  of  hauling  for  him  ;  I  also  knew  Mr.  Black; 
on  the  morning  referred  to  I  was  at  the  corner  of  the  bridge ;  Mr. 
McKaig  passed  me,  and  we  spoke  to  each  other;  he  was  carrying 
a  little  cane,  and  changed  it  from  his  right  to  his  left  hand  soon 
after  passing  me;  I  then  saw  him  put  his  hand  behind  him,  and 
saw  something  shine  as  he  did  so  ;  he  soon  met  Black,  and  a  shot 
was  tired,  but'l  did  not  see  who  did  it ;  I  saw  McKaig  drop  his 
cane  and  throw  up  his  hands  as  soon  as  the  first  shot  was  fired ;  I 
was  on  the  lower  corner  of  the  bridge;  Black  was  coming  up  street, 
and  met  him  face  to  face. 

Cross-examined  by  Mr.  Whitney  : 

It  was  about  1)4  or  8  o'clock  when  the  shooting  occurred,  and  I 
was  hauling  coal  to  Mr.  Lowndes'  law  office ;  I  left  my  horse  and 
cart,  and  walked  down  the  street  to  see  about  getting  some  hauling 
from  Mr.  Hughes;  I  left  my  cart  about  thirty  or  forty  feet  from 
the  other  end  of  the  bridge  from  where  the  shooting  took  place  ;  I 
was  hauling  coal  from  the  car;  I  keep  my  cart  on  Court  street, 
three  or  four  squares  from  Baltimore  street;  I  took  my  horse  out 
of  the  stable,  and  went  to  the  car  and  took  a  load  of  coal  to  Mr. 
Lowndes'  office,  but  could  not  get  into  his  yard;  there  was  another 
colored  man  with  me,  by  the  name  of  Garner  ;  I  know  Cornelius 
Conner,  but  do  not  remember  seeing  him  that  morning;  I  was 
standing  at  Ryan's  corner;  Mr.  McKaig  crossed  the  Street,  and 
changed  his  cane  from  one  hand  to  the  other:  I  saw  him  draw 
something  like  a  pistol  ;  1  did  not  see  aim  speak  or  shake  hands 
With  anybody  until  he  met  Black;  1  saw  something  shine;  the. 
sun  was  shining,  and  made  this  thing  glisten;  I  did  not  see  any- 
thing drawn  ;  i  told  a  good  many  person-  of  this  matter  down  at 
tiie  wharf;  i  can't  remember  belling  anyone  except  a  colored  man 
that  L  saw  McKaig  put  his  hand  behind  him  ;  I  saw  nothing  in 
his  hands  when  he  threw  them  up  ;  the  hands  went  up  as  S<  ion  as 
the  first  shot  was  fired:  1  did  not  see  the  first  fire;  when  the 
second  shot  was  fired  McKaig  was  in  the  middle  of  the  street; 
Black  followed  him;  the  third  was  lired  as  he  attempted  to  raise 
on  the  pavement  at  the  post;  the  fourth  fire  was  across  the  street. 
2k 


18  TRIAL    OP  HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

WiUicm  Waif,  for  the  defense,  was  called,  and  testified:  T 
reside  in  Cumberland;  have  live  there  all  my  life:  i  knew  W".  W. 
McKaig,  Jr.,  by  sight,  and  know  Harry  Black  welj  ;  on  the  morn- 
ing of  the  shooting  T  was  standing  on  I  litesideof  the 
street  from  where  it  took  place  ;  I  was  talking  to  Dr.  P.  A.  Healy; 
I  saw  Black  coming  by  Dietz's  corner  toward  the  bridge;  McKaig 
was  coining  down  the  street;  Dri.  Healy  called  myatteafcton  to 
them,  and  said,  "see  thosetwo  men  meet;'-5  as  they  met  the  firing 
commenced  ;  after  the  first  shot  McKaig  dropped  a  pistol  from  his 
hand  just  outside :the  curbstone  into  the  street^  Mr.  McKaig  ran 
over  to  the  post  on  the  opposite  side  of  the  street,  and  then  back 
to  the  middle  of  the  street ;  when  McKaig?s  hands  went  up  after 
the  first  shot,  the  pistol  mentioned  dropped  from  them;  I  saw 
McKaig  when  he  crossed  over  the  bridge,  and  he  had  a  cane  swing- 
ing in  his  left  hand. 

Cross-examined  by  Mr.  Whitney  : 

I  was  standing  talking  to  Dr.  Healy,  and  he  called  my  attention 
to  McKaig  and  Black;  I  talked  it  over  with  Dr.  Healy  different 
times  since  as  to  the  occurrence;  I  don't  know  of  saying  to  Dr. 
Healy  that  I  saw  a  pistol  in  McKaig's  hand,  I  can't  say  that  I 
ever  told  Dr.  Healy  that  there  was  no  pistol  in  McKaig's  hand  ;  I 
never  saw  the  pistol  until  it  fell  into  the  street  outside  the  curb- 
stone; I  told  a  number  around  there  that  day  alter  Mr.  Turney 
picked  it  up;  be  picked  it  up  immediately  after  the  Bhooting;  I 
think  it  was  after  the  body  was  carried  rfito  Dr.  Smith's  o 
Dr.  Healy's  and  Dr.  Smith's  office  is  the  same  ;  Mr.  McKaig  met 
Mr.  Conner  near  the  corner  of  Canal  street;  I  know  Mr.  Conner 
very  well ;  I  know  Mr.  Langgold,  of  Cumberland,  but  am  not  cer- 
tain of  having  had  a  conversation  with  him  about  it ;  I  have  no 
recollection  of  telling  Mr.  Langgold  in  my  shop,  during  the  last 
three  weeks,  that  there  was  no  such  thing  as  Mr.  McKaig  having 
a  pistol  in  his  hands. 

After  the  examination  of  this  witness  the  Court  stated  that  the 
hour  for  adjournment  (3  p.  m.)  had  arrived,  and  the  court  would 
now  adjourn  until  Friday  morning  at  9  o'clock. 


FOURTH  DAY. 

Continuation  of  Testimony  on  the  Part  of  the  Defense — Witnesses 
Called  to  Prove  the  Character  of  the  Prisoner — Interesting  Evidence 
in  Relation  to  the  Killing. 

Promptly  at  9  o'clock  the  court  met  for  the  fourth  day's  proceed- 
ings. All  the  judges  and  other  officers  of  the  court  were  in  attendance, 
as  were  all  the  counsel  for  both  prosecution  and  defense.  As  usual, 
the  prisoner  was  looking  well  and,  apparently,  perfectly  self-possessed 
and  calm.     Around  the  counsel  for  the  prosecution  sat,  as  during  the 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    Wl    jflCAIG,   JR.  19 

entire  proceedings,  a  large  number  of  the  relatives  and  frie  ids  of  the 
deceased  ;  most,  of  them— if,  indeed,  not  all  of  them — being  lawyers  of 
more  than  ordinary  natural  and  legal  ability.    Immediately  after  the 

opening  of  the  court — 

John  Hipp  was  called  for  the  defense  and  testified  as  follow-;  ■  I 
reside  in  Cumberland  and  am  a  brick-layer ;  I  knew  Mr.  McKaig,  and 
I  know  the  prisoner ;  I  saw  i  hem  on  the  morning  of  the  shooting;  I  was 
on  the  opposite  side  of  the  street,  at  Dieftz's  store*  at  the  time^  and  I 
first  saw  them  after  the  second  shot  was  fired;  my  attention  Was  called 
to  them  by  the  first  shot ;  I  turned  around  to  Mr.  Dietz  and  said.  k'  My 
God,  they  are  killing  each  other."  MoKaigran  across  the  Btreel  after 
the  first  lire  and  Black  followed;  1  saw  McKaigwhen  he  fell, and  I  saw 
a  revolver  in  the  baud  of  each  of  them  ;  they  ran  across  the  street 
toward  Reed's  store  ;  after  the  first  fire  Loth  sprang  off  the  curb-stone 
toward  the  middle  of  the  street ;  McKaig  fell  about  twenty  feel  from 
me,  about  the  middle  of  the  street;  after  the  first  fire  i  could  see 
everything  that  passed,  except  that  I  did  not  sec;  them  when  they 
reached  the  pavement  on  my  side  of  the  street. 

Cross-examined  by  Mr.  Whitxey,  for  the  prosecution  : 

Mr. 1  >ietz  is  a  brick-layer,  but  keeps  a  green  grocery ;  I  was  going  to 
work  for  him  the  morning  of  the  shooting;  1  went  into  the  back  yard 
five  minutes  after  fee  shooting;  I  jumped  over  the  back  yard  fenjce;  Mi'. 
Dietz  assisted  me  over;  I  did  not  want,  to  go.  out  in  the  street  an 
taken  to  corn*!  ;  after  McKaig  fell  Dietz  and  I  both  went  in  the  back 
yard,  and  there  we  remained  about  live  minutes  ;  he  and  I  talked  about 
what  had  occurred  ;  I  saw  McKaig  after  the  first  shot  ;  I  was  standing 
next  to  the  door;  a  little  girl  was  in  the  store,  also;  1  don't  know 
What  became  of  her;  after  the  first  shot  I  turned  around  and  looked  ; 
when  1  first  saw  Black  and  McKaig  they  were  both  springing  away  from 
the  opposite  pavement ;  the  second  shot  was  fired  right  near  the  curb  ; 
I  only  heard  the  first  shot,  and  the  second  shot  was  fired  while  they  were 
on  the  pavement;  the  third  shot,  was  ihvd  about  the  middle  of  the 
Street  ;  \lhe  fourth  shot  was  fired  after  .McKaig  had  turned  to  run  back  ; 
there  is  a  post  in  front  of  Medore's  shoe  store  ;  be  came  near  io  ii.  and 
turned  back  and  fell  in  front  of  the  curb  at  Medore's  store;  Black  was 
behind  him  when  he  fired  the  last  shot ;  I  ran  into  the  back  yard  as 
soon  as  he  fell;  McKaig  threw  up  his  hands  and  fell  on  all-fours ;  I 
saw  the  pistol  in  his  hand  when  the  second  shot  was  fired ;  I  noticed 
no  cane ;  I  had  a.  full  view  of  his  face  and  his  body ;  [  did  not  see  the 
pistol  afterwards;  Diet/ and  i  talked  about  I  he  alfair,  and  1  talked  to 
sonic  few  others  about  it. 

Re-examined  by  Mr.   SYESTER  for  tin-  defense: 

Peter  Tarnell  em  no  to  me  twice  to  know  what  I  knew  about  it,  and 
1  told  him  if  he  did  not,  let  me  alone  I  would  break  his  neck.  He  is  a 
witness  for  the  prosecution,. 

The  wil  ness  was  asked  to  more  fully  explain  the  immediate  circum- 
stance'- of  the   shooting  as  he  saw  them;  objection  was  made  by  the 

prosecution,  as  he  had  been  examined  at  length  on  that  point  by  the 
defense. 


20  TRIAL   OF    HARRY    SBAWFORB    BLACK 

The  Court  said  i  In-  witness  cdqld  state  again  exactly  whwe  McKaig 
fell,  ami  he  .-aid  he  lull  near  the  middle  of:the  street  opposite  Medore's 
slice  store. 

George  Garnry,  for  the  defense.  was  called  and  testified  :  I  live  in 
Washington  city,  and  was  in  Cumberland  on  the  day  of  the  shooting ; 
I  have  no!  been  there  long  :  1  was  standing  on  Mr.  Ryan's  corner,  wait- 
'i-  Mr.  Hughes,  of  whom  1  was  to  get  employment,  and  1  saw  the 
shooting;  I  was  looking  across  the  street  k\  the  time}  1  heard  the 
report  of  a  pistol,  and  1  looked  ami  saw  Mr.  McKaig  and  Mr.  Blafek: 
Loth  had  pistols;  after  the  second  tire,  as  Mr.  MeKuig  rah  across  the 
street,  lie  put  his  hand  behind  hi m,  as  if  to  draw  another  pistol,  but  he 
could  not  draw  it;  he  made  for  t lie  other  side  of  the  street  but  could 
not  reach  it ;  after  the  third  shot  Mr.  McKaig  fell  on  all  fours  near  the 
i  meat:  Mr.  Black  was  On  the  opposite  side  of  the  pavement  from 
that  on  which  Mr.  McKaig  fell  when  he  fired  the  fourth  shot;  Mr. 
Black  then  said  :    "That  i<  what  yon  get  for  seducing  my  sister,  and 

I  have  another  barrel  for  any  d d  scoundrel  who  says  I  did  riot  do 

right."  McKaig  had  a  cane  and  revolver  in  his  hands,  and  he 
dropped  them  both  after  the  first  shot;  1  did  not  know  McKaig  or 
Black;  I  only  speak  of  the  man  that  was  shot  down. 

Cross-examined  by  Mr.  Whitney,  for  the  prosecution  : 

Q.  What  do  you  mean  by  Ryan's  corner  ? 

Witness.  There  ain't  but  one  corner  there  ;  everybody  calls  it 
Ryan's  corner,  and  I  call  it  Ryan's  corner,  too. 

Mr.  Whitney.  How  were  you  standing  when  you  saw  Black  and 
McKaig? 

Witness.  I  was  so  standing,  when  the  first  shot  was  tired,  that  I  did 
not  have  to  change  my  position  to  see  the  tiring;  1  had  been  standing 
there  about  fifteen  minutes  when  the  shooting  commenced;  was  by 
myself;  1  know  Enos  Davis  slightly;  did  not  see  him  there  that 
morning;  I  did  not  know  Mr.  McKaig;  I  was  about  fifteen  feet  from 
the  bridge,  and  could  see  it;  1  had  business  in  Cumberland;  was 
staying  with  John  Carey,  who  lives  on  Independent  street  ;  that  street 
is  located  seven  or  eight  squares  up  town  from  where  the  tragedy  oc- 
curred; I  left  home  about  6J  o'clock  to  get  work,  and  met  a. colored 
man  on  Baltimore  street,  and  inquired  of  him  for  work;  didn't  know 
hun  and  don't  now;  he  told  me  of  a  job  he  had  left  at  Mr.  Hughes'  ;  1 
went  to  Ryan's  corner  and  met  a  colored  man  working  for  Mr.  Hughe- ; 
came  there  beforethe  tiring  commenced;  the  first  colored  man  I  met 
near  the  St.  Nicholas  Hotel,  which  is  about  four  squares  from  Mr. 
Hughes';  I  saw  McKaig  have  a  pistol  as  he  stepped  off  the  pavetnent 
when  the  first  shot  was  fired,  and  it  fell  out  of  his  hand;  I  did  riot  see 
him  throw  up  his  hands,  but,  rather  reached  behind  as  if  he  was  getting 
another  pistol  ;  then  he  was  shot  again  as  he  started  for  the  other  curb  ; 
was  shot  the  third  time  on  his  return  about  the  middle  of  the  street,  and 
fell,  when  Black  shot  him  a  fourth  time  ;  Black  then  went  toward  the 
jail  and  delivered  himself  up;  suppose  he  delivered  himself  up,  as  ho 
got  so  near  the  jail  he  could  not  get  away  ;  the  tirsl  shot  was  tired  on 
the  pavement;  second  as  he  was  crossing  the  street;  third  on  the 
opposite  pavement,  when  McKaig  threw  his  arms  behind  him  and  ex- 
claimed, "Oh,"  and  fell  on  his  face  ;  Mr.  Black  crossed  over  the  street 
again  and  fired  the  fourth  shot;  1  went  to  work  then,  and  have  been 
in  Cumberland  ever  since. 


FOB    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    M'XAIO,    JR.  21 

Bewy  HaU\  for  6he  defense,  was  tin- next  witness 'Called.  lie  tes- 
tified&£  follows :  i  live  about  seven  criiles  east  Of  Cumberland,  and  I 
was  in  Cumberland  oq  the  morning  of  the  shooting;  I  knew  McKaig 
and  know  the  prisoner  ;  l  was,  at  the  time  of  the  shooting,  in  Mr. 
( ►•j.-le'-  harness  shop ;  1  beard  the  reports  of  the  pistol,  and  went  to  the 
door  and  saw  Mr.  McKay  fall  near  the  middle  of  the  street,  in  front 
of  Dr.  Smith's  office  5  l  saw  a  pistol  picked  up  after  he  fell ;  it  was 
near  his  right  hand;  I  did  not  know  the  person  who  picked  it  up, 
and  I  know  Mi\  Turney ;  it  was  not  him,  I  am  sure;  I  did  not  take 
particular  potiC  !  o|  Cue  man  who  picked  it  up. 

Cross-examined  by  Mr.  WlllTNEY,  for  the  prosecution  : 
The  pistol  was  Very  elbse  to  tlie  body  :  it  had  not  been  removed  when 
the  pistol  was  picked  np;   the  man  who  picked  it  up  had  mixed  gray 
hair;  it-  was  not  Mr.  Turney. 

Charles  Clark,  (a  boy  of  about  ten  years  of  age,)  was  called  for  the 
defense,  and  testified  :  I  live  in  Cumberland;  know  Mr.  Medoro;  I 
knew  Mr.  McKkig,  but  don't  know  the  prisoner;  I  wasin  Mr.  Medore's 
1  be  morniug  of  the  shool  in'g,  getti'ng  measured  lor  a  pair  of  shoes ; 
I  looked  oul  of  the  window  and  saw  Mr.  McKaig  near  .Mr.  Medore's 
door,  nn  t  Mr.  Black  following  him, ;  1  saw  a  pistol  fall  in  the  street, 
but  did  not  see  it,  fall  from  Mr.  McKaig's  baud;  it  fell  righl  in  front  of 
Mr.  Turtiey's  store, and  in  the  gutter;  after  the  third  shot  Mr.  McKaig 
fell;  Mr.  Turney  picked  up  the  pistol. 

Cross-examined  by  Mr.  Whitney,  for  the  prosecution  : 
I  heard  only  one  shot  before  looking  out  of  the  window;  I  saw 
McKaig  fall ;  both  of  them  were  off  the  pavement  when  the  pistol  fell  ; 
1  saw  only  McKaig's  left  band  ;  in  it  he  bad  a  cane  ;  the  body  lay  in  the 
middle  of  the  street  and  the  pistol  layabout  seven  feet  from  it;  I  did 
notgo  out  of  the  store  until  the  shooting  was  over;  the  pistol  was 
picked  up  after  the  body  was  taken  in,  and  the  body  had  been  pi 
up  before  i  left  tlie  sliop  ;  i  'lid  not  e-()  (<>  the  body,  and  1  did  not  see 
the  pistol  lying  there  while  the  body  was  there. 

Dr.  L.  K.  Hummelshine,  who  bad  been  summoned  by  the  prosecu- 
tion, was  called  by  the  defense,  and  testified :  I  live  in  Cumberland;  I 
knew  McKaig,  and  I  know  toe  prisoner;  E  am  a  dentist,  and  have  lived 
twenty  years  in  Cumberland;  I  witnessed  a  part  of  the  shooting  afl 
on  tii  ■     iber;  after  the  first  fire  I  saw  McKaig  retreat- 

ing from  tii'  edge  o!   the  curbstone;  he  went  towards  the  middle  of 
the  street;   1  have  no  recollection  of  seeing  anything  in  his  hand;  I 
pmething  fall  ;    he  was  near  the  edge  of  the  gutter  when  1  saw 
it  tall;    I  could  not   positively  distinguish  what   it  was;  it  was  not  a 
:    il    was   n    dark    object;     1    -aw    him   ci-ins  to    the   middle  of  the 

street,  and  Mr.  Black  then  fired  the  second  time;  McKaig  continued 
io  cross,  and,  near  the  curbstone,  stumbled,  and  oaughl   hold 
post;   be  appeared,  then,  to  reel;  my  impression  is,  that  just  bi 
b     reached  the  post,  the  third  shot  was  Bred;  he  then  retraced  his 

Steps  toward  Mr.  Black,  and  when  he  was  near  the  middle  of  l  he  - 
the  fourth  del    w,i-  liivd  ;    after  the  third  lire,  he  put  his  hand  to  his 
hack,  said    "Oh!"  and    threw  up   his   hands;   I  was  a  witness  bi 
;        rand  jury. 


22  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

Cross-exainined  by  Mr.  WhttNEy: 
I  was  standing  in  froni  of  Ryan's  store  when  I  .saw  the  firing ;  T 
wailed  there  until  the  difficulty  was  oyer';  my  impression  is  that  Black 
had  not  left  the  pavement  when  he  fired  t ■><'  second  shot. 

Lawrence  Witeon  was  next  called  for  the  defense  and  testified:  1 
was  in  Furgeson's  saloon  when  Black  and  McKais*  had  a  difficulty^  I 
think  it  was  on  Wednesdays  the  llth  of  October;  before  the  shooting, 
Mr.  McKaig  came  from  the  billiard  saloon"  and  rustled  againsl  Black" 
Black  turned  and  said,  "This  is  two  insults  yon  have  given  nits 
to-day;"  McKaig  walked  out  and  said  nothing;  MqKaig  jostled  Black 
with  his  elbow;  my  impression  at  the  time  was  that  it  was  an  invita 
fcion  to  play  a  game  of  billiards;  the  billiard  room  is  astephighei 
than  the  bar  room  and  there  was  room  enough  to  pass  wklioul 
nudging. 

Cross-examined  by  Mr.  Whitney  without  eliciting  any  new  facts. 

John  Long,  a  witness  for  the  defense,  was  cabled  and  testified  as  fol- 
lows :  I  live  in  Cumberland  ;  I  knew  W.  W.  McKaig,  Jr.,  and  r  know 
Mr.  Blade,  the  prisoner;  one  evening,  about  two  weeks  before  Mr. 
Black  shot  .McKaig,  T  was  standing  at  Shaw's"  corner,  opposite  the 
Baltimore  and  Ohio  Railroad  depot;  I  saw  Mr.  McKaig  coming  across 
the  railroad  from  the  direction  of  his  father's  house  ;  just  as  he  go1  to 
the  corner  of  the  depot  he  stepped  behind  the  depot  and  placed  his 
right  shoulder  against  the  corner  of  it  and  peeped  out  down  Balti- 
more street;  this  excited  my  curiosity  and  I  looked  down  the  street  in 
the  direction  McKaig  was  looking,  and  saw  Mr.  Black  coming  tip 
toward  McKaig;  Black  came  up  the  street  as  far  as  the  entrance  to 
the  Revere  House  barber  shop  and  stopped  ;  when  Blatck  got  nearly 
up  to  the  Revere  House,  which  adjoins  the  depot,  McKaig  drew  back 
behind  the  building;  he  had  then  a  revolver  in  his  hand  and  had  it 
down  by  his  side  ;  Black  hesitated  a  moment  at  the  door  of  the  barber 
shop,  and  then  turned  and  went  down  the  street  ;  McKaig  followed 
him  down  to  Furgeson's  saloon  and  L  saw  them  no  more. 

Cross-examined  by  Attorney  General  Jones  : 
1  have  been  keeping  a  saloon  in  Cumberland  for  the  past  year;  1  saw 
McKaig  next  to  the  ticket  office  standing  on  the  edge  of  the  platform  ; 
he  looked  down  Baltimore  street  toward  the  bridge;  [  was  standing 
directly  opposite  at  Mr.  Shaw's  warehouse;  the  city  Lamps  had  just 
been  lit  :  1  don't  think  the  train  had  come  in  yet;  there  were  not 
many  people  about;  McKaig  looked  down  Baltimore  street  ;  I  also 
looked  down  and  saw  Black  by  Mr.  Little's  jewelry  store,  comhu;'  up; 
the  lights  were  very  brilliant  ;  f  had  heard  of  some  disturbance  between 
Black's  father  and  McKaig  ;  Black  came  to  Cooper's  barber  shop  and 
then  turned  and  went  down  the  street,  as  far  as  Furgeson's  saloon  ; 
McKaig  followed;  he  walked  fast,  but  had  not  overtaken  him  when  I 
quit  looking;  I  saw  a  pistol  in  McKaigs  hand  at  the  Revere  House  ;  lie 
held  it  behind  him;  the  light  of  the  ticket  office  shone  through  the 
window;  1  did  not  immediately  notify  Black  that  McKaig  had  a  pistol 
looking  for  him  ;  1  did  not  know  what-  McKaig  would  do,  as  he  was  a 
desperate  man  and  always  went  armed;  1  saw  him  often  in  the  barber 
Shop,  for  three  or  four  weeks  before  the  tragedy,  with  a  pistol ;  on 


FOR   KILLING   COLONEL   W,    W.    m'KAIG,   JR.  23 

Sunday  evening,  the  day  before  McKaigwas  killed,  T  saw  TTarry  Black 
and  asked  birn  when  lie  had  seen  RlcKaigj  he  said  "  \yhat  is  that  to 
yon;'"  1  told  him  nothing,  bul  I  had  seen  McKaig  watching  for  him 
with  a  revolver,  ami  I  fchoughl  il  my  duly  (o  tell  liim  ;  BlaCK  told  me. 
to  mind  my  own  business,  ami  I  turned  and  left  him,  and  did  not  see 
him  again  till  after  the  shooting. 

JTciir;/  S!irir>)\  Jr.,  was  the  next  witness  called  for  the  defence. 
II13  testified  that  Black  called  at  his  store  on  his  way  to  town  be- 
tween half  past  seven  and  eight  o'clock,  on  the  morning  of  "the 
shooting.  His  testimony  was  unimportant  and  was  merely  intro- 
duced for  the  purpose  of  showing  that  Black,  in  going  down  town 
by  the  nearest  way,  would  have  to  pass  MeKaig'S  foundry.  This 
was  done  to  do  away  with  the  testimony  of  Mr.  Orrick  for  the 
prosecution,  who  testified  that  lie  saw  Black  pass  McKaig?S  foun- 
dry on  the  morning  of  the  shooting  before  it  occurred. 

Asa  Willisofai  for  the  defense,  testified  :  T  have  lived  in  Cumber- 
land thirty  .years.    I  am  not  acquainted  with  the  prisoner,  but  I 

have  always  heard  him  spoken  of  as  a  remarkably  quiet  and  peace- 
able man;  his  good  character  was  the  subject  of  general  remark. 

Mr.  Whitney  objected  to  'he  witness  being  asked  if  the  prisoner 
was  industrious  and  sober,  as  it  was  not  proper  in  an  examina- 
tion in  which  it  was  sought  to  prove  his  character  for  peace  and 
quietness. 

Fred.  J.  Nelson,  Esq.,  replied  for  the  defense,  and  insisted  that 
it  was  proper,  under  the  circumstances  of  the  case,  to  introduce 
all  the  testimony  necessary  to  establish  fully  the  whole  character 
of  the  prisoner  as  a  man  and  a  citizen. 

The  State's1  Attorney,  Francis  Brengle,  Esq.,,  replied*  that  the 
question  of  character  was  well  understood,  and  it  would  do  the 
prisoner  no  injustice  to  observe  strictly  the  established  rules  of 
law. 

The  Court  stated  that  the  rule  of  law  was  well  settled  that  only 
questions  as  to  peace,  and  quietness  were  admissible. 

The  witness  continuing:  My  persona]  acquaintance  with  the 
prisoner  is  slight,  but  I  have  heard  him  spoken  of  as  a  remark- 
ably  quiet,  peaceable,  amiable  and  honorable  young  man. 

Alfred  Spates,  (State  Senator,)  testified:  I  have  heard  the  char- 
acter of  the  prisoner  discussed;  his  reputation  is  good  for  peace. 

quietness,  and  gentlemanly  conduct;  I  have  known  him  fox- 
twenty  years. 

Mr,  Voorhees  wished  to  know  of  the  Court  if,  under  its  rules, 
it  was  not  admissible  to  introduce  testimony  to  show  what  confi- 
dence had  been  reposed  in  the  prisoner  by  those  Who  knew  trim? 

Attorney  General  Jones  objected  to  the  introduction  of  such 

testimony,  as  it  did  not  COnstil  ute  legal  testimony  in  such  a  trial. 

Mr.  Sy ester  replied  at  some  length,  urging  the  importance  and 
propriety  of  testimony  boestablisb  in  the  minds  of  the  jury  what 
sort  of  a  man  stood  before  them  for  their  verdict. 

Attorney  General  Jones  read  inn  liorities  upon  the  subject,  and 
argued  further  the  inadmissibility  of  such  testimony. 

The  Court  thought  that  the  inquiry  into  general  character  could 


24  TRIAL    OF    HARL'Y    t'K  \  WF<  HID    BLACK 

only  lie  properly  directed  to  the  point  of  "Character  involved,  and 
not  to  other  special  points  or  traits  of  character. 

The  witness  continued:  The  general  character  of  the  prisoner 
is  very  good  for  amiability,  and  even  gentleness  of  disposition. 

By  Mr.  Nelson: 

From  your  knowledge  of  his  character  and  reputation,  do  you 
believe  lie  would  be  guilty  of  wilful  murder? 

The  Court  warned  the,  witness  not  to  answer,  and  said,  it  was 
for  the  jury  to  draw  inferences,  and  not  to  have  them  from  the 
mouths  of  witnesses. 

Mr.  Nelson  replied,  urging  the  right  of  the  defense  to  enlighten 
the  jury  by  such  testimony. 

Mr.  Whitney,  for  the  prosecution,  replied,  at  considerable  length, 
earnestly  urging  the  impropriety  of  giving  to  the  jury  testimony 
of  such  an  improper  character. 

The  Court,  through  Chief  Justice  Maulsby,  said  it  was  legal 
testimony  to  prove  good  character  for  quietness,  peace,  and 
amiability,  and  gave  its  opinion  at  some  length  that  the  opinion 
formed  by  the  witness  from  knowledge  of  the  general  character 
and  reputation  of  the  prisoner  was  clearly  inadmissible. 

The  witness  continued:  I  knew  MeKaig;  he  was  a  handsome, 
stout,  well-built  gentleman,  and  was  much  stouter  than  the  pris- 
oner; he  was  about  six  feet  in  height,  and  weighed,  I  think,  about 
170  pounds. 

By  Mr.  WniTNEY: 

I  have  heard  the  character  of  Black  discussed  before  and  since 
the  shooting;  it  was  the  subject  of  much  favorable  comment. 

Captain  Powers  testified:  My  home  is  in  Baltimore  county,  but 
I  am  now  mining  in  Piedmont,  Virginia;  I  have  known  the  pris- 
oner for  eighteen  months;  his  character  cannot  be  excelled;  his 
general  character  is  very  good,  Inever  heard  it  questioned;  the 
position  of  a  superintendent  of  a  mine  is  one  peculiarly  calculated 
to  try  the  temper  and  amiability  of  a  man. 

John  L.  Browning  testified:  Hive  in  Alleghany  county,  fifty 
miles  above  Cumberland,  and  T  am  frequently  in  Cumberland,  as 
I  am  a  county  commissioner;  I  am  not  acquainted  with  the  pris- 
oner, but  have  always  heard  him  spoken  of  as  a  high-minded, 
honorable  young  man. 

A  large  number  of  other  witnesses  were  called,  all  of  whom 
testified  to  the  unusual  good  character  of  the  prisoner.  It  is 
quite  a  remarkable  fact  that  many  witnesses  put  upon  the  stand 
to  testify  as  to  Black's  character  were  witnesses  summoned  for 
the  prosecution. 

At  3  p.  m.  the  court  adjourned  until  Saturday  morning  at  9 
o'clock. 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    m'kAIG,   JR.  25 

FIFTH  DAY. 

Continuation  of  Evidence  for  the  Defense — Interesting  Debate  upon  the 
Admissibility  of  Evidence. 

On  Saturday  morning,  April  13th,  the  fifth  day's  proceedings  in 
this  case,  was  begun,  as  usual,  at  i>  o'clock. 

All  the  judges  were  upbri  the  bench,  and  the' same  intenBeini 
was  manifested  by  the  community  in  the  proceedings  as  heretofore. 
The  prisoner  came  into  court  promptly,  and  Looked  eicepdihgly  bright 
and  cheerful.     Immediately  after  (he  opening  of  i the  court,  the  evi- 
dence for  the  defense  was  continued. 

James  O'JSfnl  was  the  first  witness  called.  He  testified  :  T  reside  at 
the  Franklin  mines,  and  am  a  miner ;  I  know  the  prisoner?  hisg  ■•■- 
eral  reputation  fdr  peace  and  Quiet  is  very  good?  he  is  iu  every  re- 
spect a  gentleman  ;  his  reputation  Tor  even  temper  is  very  good,  and  it 
was  often  tried  at  the  mines  when  he  was  superinti  i  're 

Hon.  Horace  Re&leg,  clerkof  the  circuit  court  of  Alleghany  county, 
testified1!  thaveknowti  the  prisoner  twenty  years';  his 
aeter  has  always  been  exceedingly  good  5  [saw  him,  a  few  uiiii  1 
before  8  o'clock  oftb  ■  m  >rnin  ;  of  the  shooting,  coining  into  inc.  court- 
house yard  ;  lie  won'  a  light  overcoat.  The  coat  was  shown  the  wit- 
ness, and  he  said  Black  wore  (hat  coat,  or  a  similar  one,  and  tin'  it 
was  usual  for  overcoats  of  that  description  to  be  worn  at  that  season 
in  Cumberland. 

Cross-examined  by  Mr.  Whitnf.y  : 

Mr.  Black  alien  led  court,  iu  a  civil  suit  the  week  before  the  shoot- 
ing. 

The  witness  was  asked  ifhe  remembered  the  day  officii  week  upon 
which  the  father  of  1  he  prisoner  had  been  indicted  for  an  assault  upon 
Colonel  McKaig  whh  iutenfc  tq  kill. 

Objection  was  made  by  the.  defense,  and  consi  lerable  argument 
followed  between  Messrs.  Whitney,  Syester,  am!  Brengle  on  the 
Legal  propriety  of  the  Question-  The  defense  finally  withdrew  objec- 
tion. 

The  witness  continued:  The  prisoner  was  in  court  on  the  L2th 
of  last  Octoherou  business  for  the  Franklin  Mining  Company,  and 
that  business  was  settled  the  next  day?  he  wa3  noi      -  dirt-house 

at  any  time  during  the  remainder  of  thai  week,  as  far  as  the  witn  3S 
recollected  ;  his  father,  II.  D.  Black,  was  present^  I  for  shoot  ing  <  tolouel 
McKaig,  and  recognized  on  (he  loth  of  last  October. 

Elijah  Fuller  testified  :  1  am  register  of  wills  at  Cumberland,  and 
I  know  the  prisoner ;  hi-  general  reputation  for  pea  uiel  ness  is 

verygood?  I  never  saw  anything  wrong  about  him ;  E  saw  him  a 
court-house  in  Cmnberland  after  the  shooting  of  <  lolonel  McKaig. 

The  witness  was  then  asked  what  was  the  purpose  of  the  prison  r 
in  coming  to  the  court-house4  as  far  as  he  knew.    The  question  was 


26  TRIAL   OB    BARRY   QRAFFORD   V>\. AC'K 

objected  to  by  Mr.  Whitney,  and,  after  som  •  desultory  discussion,  Mr. 
Voorhees  stated  thai  the  defense  would  waive  the  question,  with  tlie 
right  t© recall  the  witness  upon  thai  point. 

George  Layman,  sheriff  of  Alleghany  county,  testified  :  The  general 
reputation  of  the  prisoner  for  peace  and  quietness  i-  gopd,- 

By  Mr.  Nelson: 

Q.  Where  did  you  arrest  Mr.  Black? 

Objection  was  Made  by  Mr.  Whitney,  whoinquired  for  what  pur- 
pose it  was  asked. 

Mr.  Nelson  replied  that  it  was  to  give  to  the  jury  all  the  circum- 
stances surrounding  the  prisoner. 

After  considerable  discussion  between  Mr.  Nelsonaad  Mr.  Whitney 
on  the  legal  right  and  propriety  of  the  qu  ssl  ion,  the  Qourt  stated  i  hat, 
in  its  opinion,  the  fact  of  the  arrest  of  the  prisoner  was  not  evidence 
of  guilt,  and,  after  expressing,  al  some  length,  its  further  opinion 
upon  the  admissibility  of  such  evidence,  refused  to  allow  the  question 
to  be  answered. 

The  witness  continued  :  I  first  saw  the  prisoner,  after  the  shooting, 
coming  around  the  court-house  com  sr,  and  going  toward-  the  jail; 
Mr.  Schafer,  my  deputy,  was  with  him.  The  witness  was  shown  a 
dark  drab-colored  overcoat,  and  asked  if  it  was  the  one  the  prisoner 
wore  on  that  occasion  ;  he  replied  that,  to  the  best  of  his  recollection, 
it  was,  but  he  could  not  be  positive. 

[A  large  number  of  other  witnesses,  gentlemen  of  high  standing  in 
and  about  Cumberland,  were  called  and  interrogated  as  to  the  ebau- 
acter  of  Black,  and  all  testified  in  the  most  flattering  manner  to  his 
amiable  disposition  and  gentlemanly  qualifications.] 

John  M.  Resley  was  the  next  witness  called  for  defense.  He,  like  all 
the  rest  of  the  witnesses  interrogated  as  to  Black's  character,  testified 
that  it  was  remarkable  lor  quiei  ness  and  gentlemanly  conduct.  He 
had  known  him  twenty  years;  they  had   been  playmates  together. 

Mr.Syester  then  handed  witness  a  letter,  and  ask£d  him  to  indentify 

the  hand  writing. 

Mr.  Whitney,  for  the  prosecution,  objected  to  the  question  being 
answered  until  the  paper  had  been  shown  to  the  Court,  that  fchej 
might  sec  its  condition  and  determine  whether  or  not  it  wouid  be  ad- 
missible, lie  denied  that  it  was  a  genuine  letter,  or  everwritten  by 
McKaig,  and  called  the  attention  of  the  Court  to  the  fact  that  it  was 
originally  written  in  pencil  and  afterward  inked  over,  thereby  de* 
stroying  its  identity  and  the  individuality  of  the  hand-writing.  The 
paper  was  handed  to  the  Court,  and  a  moment  thereafter,  while 
the  judges  were  examining  the  letter,  Mr.  Whitney  said  that,  before 
objecting  further  to  the  introduction  of  the  paper,  he  would  submit 
the  following  interrogatories  to  t  he  defense  for  anew  ers  : 

First.  What  is  the  object  of  the  testimony,  and  what  fact  is  it 
offered  to  establish,  or  that  it  tends  to  establish? 

Second.  The  ground  upon  which  the  defense  claim  the  right  to 
establish  such  a  Sict? 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL,  W.    W.    m'kAIQ,    JR.  27 

Mr.  Voorhees,  fbr  the  defense,  submitted  the  following,  in  answer  to 
the  interrogatories  bf  Mr.  Whitney  : 

The  counsel  for  the  prisoner  0ff6r  to  prove,  by  competent  evid 
that  Lis  sister  was  seduced  by  th<'  deceased,  and  that  she  Lore  a  child 
as  the  result,  and  that  such  facts  were  made  known  to  the  prisorier 
prior  to  the  homicide,  ard  had  been  the  subject  of  intense  mental 
agitation  on  the  part  of  the  prisoner  during  the  night  immediately 
preceding  the  collision  between  the  prisoner  and  the  deceased,  in 
which  the  latter  lost  his  life,  for  the  purposes  following! 

First :  To  show  the  condition  of  the  prisoner's  mind  at  the  time  of 
the  collision  and  homicide. 

Second.  To  enable  thejury  to  determine  from  such  provocation  the 
grade  of  homicide  committed  by  the  prisoner. 

Third.  To  explain  the  expressions  shown  by  the  prosecution  to. have 
been  used  by  the  prisoner  at  the  time  of  the  collision  and  the  killing. 

Fourth.  This  evidence  may  be  admissible  for  other  purposes  at  sub- 
sequent stages  of  tliis  trial,  but  the  Court  is  only  now  asked  to  rule  its 
admissibility  for  the  foregoing  purposes. 

Mr.  Whitney,  tor  the  prosecution,  in  rising  to  argue  against  tl  ! 
admissibility  of  the  letter  and  the  foregoing  propositions  of  the  de- 
fense, said  that,  upon  reflection,  he  considered  that  after  the  consump- 
tion of  more  than  two  days  of  the  time  <  if  the  Court,  since  the  opening 
statement  iri  behalf  of  the  prisoner  had  been  submitted,  they  were 
now  entering  upon  the  very  threshold  of  the  theory  of  defense,  which 
was  foreshadowed  in  the  opening  statement  of  the  prisoner's  counsel. 
Every  case  had  its  theory,  and  upon  that  ground  counsel  are  allowed 
to  make  opening  statements  to  the  jury.  These  statements  are;  • 
contain  the  tacts  expected  to  be  proved,  and  the  law  applicable  to 
those  facts.  They  arc  made  upon  the  responsibility  of  counsel,  sworn 
officers  of  the  court,  and  amenable  to  that  tribunal  for  the  correct- 
ness of  their  statements,  both  as  tolawand  fact.  The  theory  of  the 
defense  assumed  in  the  opening  statement,  was  the  seduction  by  Mc- 
Kaig  of  the  prisoner's  sister,  and  the  fact  that  he  was  the  father  of  lieu 
child.  If  these  questions  of  fact  could  be  fully  gone  into,  upon  the 
one  side  a-  well  as  the  oiher,  no  objection  would  be  made  on  the  part 
of  the  prosecution  to  try  those  issues  of  fact  before  the  jury,  and  if  the 
evidence  now  offered  tended  to  establish  their  truth',  he  would  make 
no  objection,  provided  the  doors  were  to  be  opened  wide  to  both  .-ides 
to  investigate  the  truth  or  falsity  of  the  facts  alleged  ;  but,  understand- 
ing the  rule  of. the  law  to  be  that  where  counsel  allowed  illegal  testi- 
mony to  be  introduced  without  object  ion,  they  would  not  be  entitled  to 
oiler  evidence  in  rebuttal,  it  became,  therefore,  the  duty  of  the  prose- 
cution to  place  themselves  right  before  the  court  and  jury,  and  object 
to  the  testimony  offered,  unless  upon  the  distinct  understanding  that 
they  should  have  the  right  to  show  the  allegation  of  seduction  to  be 
utterly  and  entirely  false. 

Mr.  Whitney  then  argued  at  considerable  length  in  relation  to  the 
effect  of  the  evidence  sought  to  be  offered,  and  quoted  largelyfxom 
authorities  to  substantiate  the  position  assumed  by  the  prosecution  in 
relation  to  the  evidence  tending  to  prove  seduction. 

lie  then  proceeded  to  state  the  legal  propositions  that  he  considered 
laid  at  the  foundation  of  the  entire  argument :  First,  that  no  provoca- 
tion known  to  the  law  justified  a  homicide;  second,  provocation  could 
only  be  offered  to  reduce  the  homicide  from  a  higher  to  a  lower  grade ; 


28  TBXAi    OF    HARRY   CRAWFORD    BLACK 

third,  thai  what  constituted  provocation  was  a  question  for  (he  Court; 
and  fifth,  the  existence  of  that  provocation  in  any  particular  case  wag 
-lion  of  fact  for  the  jury  to  determine;. 

Having  fullj  elaborated  the  above  pouitjSj  lie  then  proceeded  to  make 
their  application.  Referring  to  the  opening  statement  of  Mr.  Syester, 
he  called  the  attention  of  the  cbtirt  to  the  declaration  inn  It-  by  him 
(Mr.  S.)  to  the  jury,  thai  "  this  was  either  a  ease  of  muixler  in  the  first 
degree,  or  it  was  nothings"  This  was  the  position)  assumed  b^the  de- 
fense, and  therefore  excluded  all  question  or  idea  of  provocation, 
which  alone  could  be  introduced  60  reduce  the  grade  of  :i  crime  actu- 
ally committed.  All  efforts,  therefore,  fid  introduce  tli •■  evidence  apod 
the  ground  of  prbvbaa/fciori  must  fail,  and  if  could  be  urged  as  admissi- 
ble only  upoU  the  broad  ground  of  justification. 

Tie  then  proceeded  to  argue  the  proposition  advanced  by  the  defense 
that  it  was  admissible  forthe  purpose  of  showing  the  state  of  feeling 
under  which  Black  was  laboring  at  the  time  of  committiug  the  h(  mi- 
cide.  lie  called  ilie  atteivion  of  the  ( 'onri  totheifaet  that  no  defense 
of  insanity  or  frenzy  had  b'eeti  set  up  in  tniscase,  and  then  proceeded  to 
illustrate  bow,  in  certain  cases,  where  insanity  was  set  up  as  a  def 
evidence  of  such  a  character  inight  be  introduced,  in  those  bale's  i! 
was  admitted  upon  the  theory  that  insanity  consisted  of  different 
kinds,  each  land  having  different  degreed,  and  each  kind  and  degree 
accompanied1  by  its'  particular  development ;  and  in  a  case  whereevl^ 
dence  was  Ihtrddueed  to  establish  one  kind  of  insanity,  accompanied 
by  its  peculiar  developments,  it  was  then  admissible  for  the  puvpose  of 
showing  that  a  sufficient  cause  existied  to- produce  the  peculiar  kind 
and  developments  of  the  insanity  sought  to  be  established. 

lie  fully  reviewed  and  commented  upon  tin1  cases  Of  Sickles  and 
Mary  Harris,  and  contended  that  in  each  of  those  cases  testimoU3  of 
kind  had  been  excluded.  He  then  proceeded  to  argue  the  propo- 
sition that,  even  admittiug  evidence  of  that  kind  to  be  admissible, 
there  Avas  nothing  in  the  letteroffered  tending  in  the  least  degree  to 
establish  the  charge  of  adultery.  He  characterized  it  as  an  evident 
attempt  to  shrrk  the  broad  question  of  seduction,  which  the  State 
offered  themselves  to  disprove.  lie  then  pointed  out  the  terrible  con- 
nees  to  society  of  the  announcement  of  any  such  principle  by  a 
tribunal  of  justice — that  it  would  not  only  engraft  upon  our  laws 
adultery  and  seduction  as  a  full  justification  for  the  taking  of  human 
life  by  any  person,  ttirough  malice  or  revenge,  and  then  come  into 
a  court  of  justice  and  set  upas  his  justification  that  he  had  been  in- 
formed that  either  of  these  Offenses  had  been  committed.  Such  a  doe- 
trine  would  place  the  life  of  cvvy  man  in  t  he  hands  of  the  most  com- 
mon harlot,  break  down  all  law,  subvert  government,  and  overthrow 
society.  Mr.  Whitney  then  proceeded  to  illustrate  the  above  positions 
by  calling  attention  to  the  particular  facts  in  this  case.  That,  meet- 
ing McKaig  upon  the  mdrning  in  question, he  shoots  him  down  in  c  >id 
blood,  and  after  his  lips  have  been  sealed  in  death  and  Iris  soul  ushered 
into  eternity,  be  then,  for  the  first  time,  standing  by  the  dead  body  of 
Ids  victim,  accuses  him  of  having  been  the  seducer  Of  his  sister,  and 
now  claims,  as  a  justification  of  his  bloody  t\ci't\,  that  he  had  been  in- 
formed that  such  was  the  fact,  without  giving  an  opportunity  to  the 
unfortunate  deceased  to  deny  the  fact,  and  to  establish  his  innocence. 
He  contended  that  this  was  not  only  making  every  man  judge,  jury,  and 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    M'KAbd,   JR.  29 

executioner,  b.til  was  giving  to  liim  the  power  to  execute  befoi  ■  he  had 
established  tne'guTH  of!the  party.  Mr.  Whitney  spoke  for  ati  hour 
ami  a  quarter,  and  his  remarks,  which  were  forcibly  and  eloquently 
pur,  were  listened  to  throughout  with  Close  attention. 

Mr.  Voorhqes,  for  the  defense,  in  reply  to  Mr,  Whitney,  said  : 
I  shall  not  detain  the  court  much  km#er  on  the  question  beforc'lt. 
It,  i.<  always  pleasant  to  listen  to  a  counsel  so  able  and  ingenious  as  has 
jusi,  taken  his  seat,  bul  the  arguments  ilseid  arc  not  raewout  novel-.  They 
haw  been  uttesred  over  the  graves  < a' adulterers  and  violators  of  homes 
for  the  past  hundred  years.  They  are  always  heard  in  eases  similar  to 
the  one  now  being trie'di  In  reference  to  the  wail  thai  is  now  being 
made  over  the  dead  body  of  McKaig,  that  he  was  ah  ol  down  without 
being, 'charged  with  the  act  and^au  opportunity  given  to  deny  it,;  jwe 
will  prove,  by  his  own  admission,  that  there  was  no  necessity  to 
charge.it.  McKaig  had  admitted  that  he  wrote  the  letter. offered  as 
testimony,  which,  upon  its  face,  bears  the  evidence  of  the  criminal  in- 
timacy between  himself  and  her  to  whom  it  was  addressed.  The  let- 
ter,, ii  appears,  was  delivered  to  Mi-s  Black  while  she  was  on  a  visit  to 
a- friend's  housei;  that  she  tore  it  iu.-,twp  (Pieces  and  threw  it  into  the 
grate,  and  supposed  it  was  destroyed,  but  where  it  was  afterwards 
found.  All  lb  ■-."  facts,  in  confirmation  of  the  authorship,  were  known 
to  the  prisoner,  and  contributed  to  excite  that,  freuziecl  condition  of 
mind  under  which  he  was  laboring  at  the  time  of  his  meeting  with 
McKaig. 

The  common  law,  a?  written  in  the  books,  has  been  modified  by  the  \ 
unwritten  law  pronounced  in  the,  verdict  of  .juries,  which  throws  its 
protection  over  the  sanctity  of  homes,  and  shields  them  from  dishonor. 
T  have  not  known  a  case  for  two  hundred  years  where  a  father,  a 
brother,  or  husband  has  taken  the  law  in  his  own  hands  and  avenge  • 
the  dishonor  of  a  daughter,  sister,  or  wife,  and  where  the  motive  Was 
pure  and  free  from  any  sordid  views,  in  which  a  court,  or  jury  has 
found  a  conviction. 

I  challenge  the  production  of  a  single  adjudicated  case,  in  the  whole 
range  of  civilized  jurisprudence,  where  any  distinction  has  been  made 
in  the  rulings  of  courts  or  the  verdicts  of  juries  between  the  case  of  a 
husband  tried  for  killing  the  seducer  of  his  wife,  a  father  for  killing 
the  seducer  of  his  daughter,  and  a  brother  for  slaying  one  who,  as  in 
this  case,  had  ruined  hissister.  The  reason  fortius  uniformity  in  all 
such  cases  consists  in  the  fact  that  a  home  is  a  divine  instil  ution  ;  that 
the  purity  of  the  domestic  circle  cannot  be  invaded  and  destroyed 
without  the  destruction  of  Civilized  society,  and  therefore,  whoever, 
defends  it  violates  no  law,  either  human  or  divine. 

In  the  onward  progress  of  the  sciences,  i  regret  that  the  science  pf 
Of  the  law,  born  in  the  ruder  ages  of  our  race,  has  hot  been  improved 
and  adapted  to  the  present  higher  developments  of  the  age  and  so- 
ciety, and  to  the  great  social  problems  of  the  day.  A  great  English 
judge  has  said  thai  '-the  dishonor  of  a  home  by  the  seduction  of  the 
wife  was  a  provocation  to  the  husband  greater  than  human  nature  can 
bear" — and  courts  can  lake  cognizance  of  human  nature.  All  that 
men  have  to  do  is  to  consult  theirowu  heart-,  their  own  feeling-,  'heir 
own  instincts,  and  theirowu  sen-e  of  honor,  and  they,  too,  will  de- 
cide that  seduction  is  a  crime  which  wrings  the  heart  of  man  bcyblid 
what  human  nature  can  bear. 


30  TRIAL    OF    IIALLY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

T!  ise  was  one.  of i thempsf  Ably  tried  cases  of  the  kind  in 

the  land.  It  was  tried  by  the  ablest  counsel  on  both  sides,  who  ex- 
hausted every  legal  aspecl  of  the  case,  and,  like  this,  the  prosecution  had 
wealth  and  power  behind  it.  In  thai  case  the  precise  question  which 
is  presented  in  this  case  was  decided  in  favor  of  the  defense.  The 
confession  of  the  wife  of  the  defendant  was  ruled  out,  because  she  was 
hi-  wife  and  ii  exonerated  her  husband,  but  the  expression  of  the  pris- 
oner at  the  time  of  the  firing,  thai  "hia  bed  had  been  dishonored," 
Ac.,  was  admitted,  as  in  this  case.  So  completely  'Ii;!  the  court  allow 
the  proof  of  adultery  to  be  admitted,  that  the  prosecution  afterwards 
offered  to  admit  the  confession  of  the  wife,  because,  they  said,  it  could 
not  further  affect  the  case. 

We  are  obliged  to  refer  to  the  rulings  and  practice  in  the  most  impor- 
tant and  ably  t  ried  cases  at  nisi  priu*.  b<  cause  cases  of  tlii-  kind  never 
reach  the  higher  courts  of  appeal.  There  are  never  any  convictions  under 
which  the  prisoner  can  carry  exceptions  to' the  rulings  of  the  courts  below 
to  the  higher  courts  for  review  and  adjudication.  There  is  one  principle 
now  established  in  connection  with  ihe  subject,  thai  it  is  noi  ojeeesgary 
for  a  husband  to  witness  his  own  shame — to  see  it  with  his  own  eye. — 
in  order  to,  justify  him  in  becoming  his  own  avenger  ;  and  the  same 
rule  applies  to  a  father  and  son  as  to  a  husband. 

In  this  case  McKaig  was  not  content  with1  destroying  the  sister  of 
the  prisoner,  but  he  sough!  by  browbeating  and  menacing  the  hoy.  to 
pursue  and  kill  him  if  possible.  Such  conduct  was  more  than  the 
judges  which  grace  this  bench,  more  than  the  counsel  for  the  prosecu- 
.  more  than  those  around  him,  more  than  the  jury  in  the  box, 
more  than  human  nature  could  bear,  imagine  the  meeting  between 
the  prisoner  and  the  deceased  on  that  fatal  morning;  one  was  a  man 
in  years,  stalwart  and  powerful  in  si/.e,  the  other  comparatively  a  boy 

I  in  age  and  physical  stature,  but  when  McKaig  approached  him  with 
his  hand  in  deadly  preparation  upon  his  pistol,  crossing  the  streel  to 
confront  him,  the  image  of  a  ruined  sister,  defiled  and  trampled  into 
the  very  mire  by  this  man,  connected  itself  with  thoughts  of  bis  own 
persona]  safety  and  personal  honor,  and  he  would  have  been  more  or 
less  than  human  if  the  very  whirl  of  delirium  and  t  he  rage  of  madness 
had  not  inspired  his  heart  and  brain.  Under  such  circumstances,  no 
wonder  that  the  powerful  man  fell  in  the  encounter  with  this  boy. 
There  is  always  a  providence  hovering  Over  such  a  scene.  The  pris- 
oner was  1  lie  victim  of  accumulated  ami  unbearable  wrongs.  The  case 
of  Mary  Harris  had  been  referred  to  by  the  opposite  counsel.  It  illus- 
trated this  point.  She  had  never  handled  or  used  a  pistol,  yet,  her  aim 
seemed  guided  by  some  miraculous  agency. 

In  the  piv-eut  case  the  proof  was  ■shown  that  McKaig  was  a  practiced 
and  most  Skillful  shot,  [f  he  had  been  clothed  with  innocence  and  his 
quarrel  had  been  just,  the  Chances  would  have  been  ninety  in  a  hun- 
dred in  his  favor.  If  is  said  iie  was  a,  brave  man.  Hut  conscience 
palsies  the  right  arm  of  the  seducer  and  the  adulterer  whenever  and 
wherever  he  confronts  the  injured  and  outraged  husband,  father  or  sou. 

Attorney  General  Jones  then  replied  to  Mr.  Voorhocs,  in  a  lengthy 
argument,  contending  that  the  evidence  was  clearly  inadmissible.  At 
its  conclusion,  the  court  adjourned  until  Monday  morning,  at  9 
o'clock,  reserving  its  opinion  011  the  point  raised  until  that  time. 


FOR    KILLINC    COLONEL    W.    W.    M'KAKU,    JR.  81 

SIXTH   DAY. 

Further  Proof  as  to  Good  Character — Opinion  of  the  Court  in  volition 
to  the  Evidence  of  Seduction — That  Letter — Interesting  Evidence  for 
the  Defense. 

Monday*  April  17th,  the  court  convened  at  precisely  9  o'clock  A.  M., 
for  the  sixth  day's  proceedings  in  the  case. 

The  court-room  was.  at  an  early  hour,  Crowded  with  an  anxious  au- 
dience* who, .after  listening  to  the  able  and  eloquent  arguments  of 
counsel  on  Saturday,  were  anxious  to  hear  what  would  be  the  ruling, 
of  the  Court  upon  the  question  raised. 

As  soon  as  the  court  was  called,  Chief  Justice  Maulsby  said,  in 
reference  to  the  point  raised  by  the  prosecution  on  Saturday,  that  it 
was  the  opinion  of  the  Court  that  it  is  not  competent  to  prove  the  fact, 
of  seduction  as  a  fact  tending  to  the  issue  in  this  cause.  It  is  compe- 
tent tor  the  defense  to  offer  proof  of  the  condition  of  the  mind  of  the 
prisoner  at  the  time  of  the  homicide.  The  question  is,  what  effect  was 
made  upon  the  mind  of  the  prisoner  by  the  communications  made  t,> 
him  by  words,  or  in  any  other  manner,  in  relation  to  the  all  sged  se- 
duction of  his  sister? 

After  the  delivery  of  the  opinion,  Mr.  Voorhees,  for  the  defense, 
said  that  there  were  present  two  distinguished  gentlemen,  who  had 
come  here  of  their  own  volition,  to  testify  in  behalf  of  the  prisoner, 
and  he  desired  to  put  them  upon  the  stand,  that  they  might  return  to 
Washington  by  the  next  train. 

The  counsel  for  the  prosecution  consented,  and  lion.  II.  0.  Davis, 
of  West  Virginia,  was  called. 

Examined  by  Mr.  VOORHEES  : 

Mr.  Davis*  state  where  you  reside,  your  position  at  present,  and 
whether  you  Know  II.  c.  Black? 

A.  1  reside  in  Piedmont,  West. "Virginia ;  am  a  United  states  Sena- 
tor from  West  Virginia ;  I  have  known  Crawford  Black  for  the  past 
eighteen  months  or  two  years — from  the  time  he  wa9  superintendent 
of  the  Franklin  coal  mines;  [  knew  him  in  Piedmont. 

Mr.  Voorhees.  State  his  character  in  that  community  for  peace 
and  quietness. 

A.  I  have  not  known  him  intimately,  but  from  what  1  know,  bis 
character  was  beyond  question;  I  had  almost  daily  intercourse  with 
him  i:i  a  business  way. 

Mr.  Voobhees.  state  whether  his  position  as  a  superintendent  was 
calculated  to  test  him? 

A.  I  think  if  was. 

Hon.  Jackson  L.   Orr  called  : 

1  reside,  in  the  town  of  Montana,  Boone  county,  Iowa,  and  am  a 
member  of  the  (Jnited   States   [louse-  or  Representatives  from  that 

Stale;   I    knew  Crawford    Black,  the  prisoner,  at    my  home   in   Iowa, 
from  the  latter  part  of  1867  until  early  in  the  year  leGD. 


32  TRIAL   OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

Q.  Wba1  v  as  his  business  there? 

A.  He  was  clerking  in  a  store  which  belonged  to  a  Arm  of  which  I 

member. 
Q.  Did  yon  know  hi?  general  ■  r,  an  1  If  so,  what  was  it? 

A.  i  became  acquainted  with  his  general  cha  'acterWhile  there,  and 
u  was  yvy  good  ;  I  never  heard  anything  allege  1  against  it. 

Cross-examined  by  Air.  Whitney  : 

Q.  Do  you  mean  by  his  general  good  character  that  you  never  heard 
anything  alleg  d  a  >;ains1  i;  ? 

A.  I  do. 

Mr.  Whitney  said  thai   he  would  like  to  have  the  reasons  fortbe 
opinion  delivered  this  morning  in  Poll;  that,  ae  no  doubi   this 
would  contribute  mueh  to  settle  the  law  in  Maiyland,  whleh  is  to  gov* 
ern  in  cases  of  this  character,  il  was  necessary  that  they  should  have 
ir.  to  see  what  bearing  it  might  have  on  evidence  to  be  offered. 

Chi  .         aid  the  whole  question  had  not  been  clearly 

presented  tothe  Court,  because  coupled  with  conditions.  The  atto 
general,  in  hi-  argument  on  Saturday,  said  that  the  counsel  forthe 
e  only  wanted  a  decision  on  the  piece  of  evidence  offered,  and 
that  in  the  opinion  delivered  the  Court  has  attempted  to  confine  itself 
strictly  lo  that,  because  of  the  great  danger  of  being  misapprehended, 
by  either  the  jury  or  other  persons,  they  did  not  amplify,  bul  thai  at 
requesl  of  counsel  they  would  present  their  opinion  inure  fully,  con- 
ig  themselves,  however,  within  the  narrowest  possible  Umifc  lie 
then  proceeded  to  deliver  the  opinion  of  the  Court  as  follows  : 

"The  defense  offered  to  read  in  evidence  a  paper  which,  it  has 
offered  evidence  to  prove,  is  in  the  handwriting  of  the  party  killed, 
and  which  it  announces  that  it  will  prove  to  have  been  addressed  by 
the  d  o  the  sister  of  the  traverser,  and  to  have  been  received 

by  I  ■•-,  and  afterwards,  and  prior  to  the  killing,  to  have  been  commu- 
i  i  he  prisoner.  And  being  called  on  by  the  State  to  state  the 
objeci  of  fur  testimony,  and  what  tact  it  is  offered  to  establish^  or 
tends  to  prove,  replies,  that  it  offers  to  prove  by  competent  evidence 
that  the  sister  of  the  prisoner  was  seduced  by  the  deceased,  and  that 
she  bore  a  child  as  the  result,  and  that  .such  tacts  were  made  known  to 
prisonernrior  tothe  homicide,  and  had  been  the  subject  of  intense 
mental  agitation  on  the  part  of  the  prisoner  during  the  night  immedi- 
ately preceding  the  collision  between  the  prisoner  and  tin;  deceased,  in 
which  the  latter  Lost  his  life,  for  the  purposes  of  showing  the  condition 
of  the  prisoner's  mind  at  the  time  of  the  collision  and  homicide,  and 
of  showing  the  grade  of  the  homicide,  and  by  way  of  explaining  ex" 
pres  >ions  used  by  tie'  prisoner  at  the  time  of  the  homicide,  and  admitted 
in  evidence  by  the  Court  on  the  cross-examination  of  the  Stale's  wit- 
nesses. 

"The  State  objects  to  the  admissibility  of  the  proof  offered. 

"The  court  is  of  opinion  that  it  is  not  competent  to  prove  in  Ibis 
case  the  fact  of  (lie  seduction  of  the  sister  of  the  prisoner  by  the 
d  ceased.  It  is  competent  to  oiler  evidence  tending  lo  prove  the  con- 
dition of  the  mind  of  the  prisoner  on  the  occasion  of  the  homicide, 
either  by  proof  of  communications  made  to  him  on  the  subject  of  the 
seduction  of  bis  sister  by  the  deceased,  or  any  facts  and  circumstances 
coming  to  bis  knowledge  touching  that  subject;  that  the  paper 
offered  is  admissible,  coupled  with  the  proof  slated,  for  any  and  all 
the  purposes  before  stated  by  the  Court." 


FOR    KILLING   COLONEL    W".    w\    m'kAIG,   JR.  33 

After  the  delivery  of  this  Qpjnion  Mr.  Whitney  turned  to  the  counsel 
for  the  defense  and  offered  to  go  into  a  full  investigation  of  the  alleged 
seduction  of£he  prispner's  sister  and  the  paternity  of  the  child,  stating 
thai  although  McKaig  never  knew  Myra  Black  until  after  the  war,  that 
the  State  was  prepared  to  prove  both,  by  particular  acts  and  general. 
reputation,  that  prior  to  the  war  she  was  not  a  virtuous  woman,  and 
that  during  and  subsequent  thereto  she  was  a  person  of  known  loose 
character. 

Mr.  Voorhees,  for  the  defense,  objected  to  the  line  of  wanton  remarks 
on  the  part  of  the  prosecution,  when  there  was  nothing  before  the 
Court.  The  whole  subject  of  seduction  had,  he  said,  been  ruled  out 
by  the  Court,  and  was  not,  therefore,  a  question  at  issue,  and  they 
were  not  willing  to  accept  the  offer  <>f  the  prosecution  to  make  it  a 
question! 

Mr.  Whitney  then  said  lie  desired  to  make,  an  application  to  the 
Court.  The)  defense!  in  its  opening  statement  to  the  jury  alleged  'the 
fae!  of  seduction,  the  result  of  which  was  the  birth  of  a  child.  This 
ing  statement  having  gone  before  the  jury,  which,  under  the  ruling 
of  the  Court,  ciiiiiiot  be  rebutted,  he  suggested  to  the  Court  that  so  much 
of  it  as  the  Court  had  stated  was  not  pertinent  to  the  issue  should  be 
withdrawn;  and  asked  the  Court  to  instruct  the  jury  that  it  formed  no 
part  of  the 

<  hief  Justice  Maulsby  said  that  the  Court  did  not  feel  called  upon 
tdgive  any  instructions  to  the  jury  at  this  time  affecting  the  whole 
:  that  it  was  beyond  the  province  of  the  Court  to  give,  instructions 
to  the  jury  or  rule  upon  any  matters  beyond  the  legal  questions  pre- 
sented to  it. 

Lloyd  L mcnde.fi,  Exq.,  was  next  called  for  the  defense,  and  testified 
that  he  is  a  lawyer  in  Cumberland  ;  married  the  cousin  of  the  pris- 
oner ;  never  mentioned  to  prisoner  his  sister's  name  after  she  left 
I  lumberiand  until  the  Sunday  lie  fore  il\r  shooting  ;  the  prisoner  came 
to  his  house  that  Sunday  morning;  witness  then  told  him  about  a  let- 
ter written  by  Colonel  McKaig  to  his  sister;  be  had  not  seen  the  letter 
himself;  only  heard  of  it;  told  the  prisoner  that  hi-  sister  would  have 
to  come  on  to  attend  the  trial  of  her  father;  told  him  thai  W.  W. 
McKaig  was  the  seducer  of  his  sister ;  he  seemed  greatly  agitated  and 
distressed,  and  left  the  house  and  went  to  Mr.  Romanes  residence; 
witness  also  went  up  there  a  i\'\v  moments  afterwards;  and  there,  in 
hi-  presence,  the  prisoner  read  that  letter,  and  soon  after  left  the  house 
next  time  witness  saw  him  was  in  his  mother's  house  that  same  after- 
noon; the  prisoner  was  in  the  room  and  overheard  the  conversation 
held  by  him  with  his  mother;  witness  asked  his  mother  where  her 
daughter  was,  and  after  some  hesitation  the  mother  said  she  could  not 
tell;  he  said  he  must  know  her  address,  thai  he  was  preparing  a  de- 
tens  •  in  her  father's  case,  and  i  lia!  she  must  return  home  to  attend  his 
trial;  she  then  told  him  that  she  had  a  child  four  months  old,  and 
gave  its  name  and  the  date  of  its  birth;  the  prisoner  was  nervous, 
■hand  restless;  after  being  there  sometime,  the  prisonerwent 
into  the  next  room;  he  hc.ard.him  walking  up,  and  down  the  floor  ex- 
citedly; witness  Left  and  walked  up  town;  the  prisoner  went  with 
him,  and  left  him  at  witness's  gate;  where  the  prisoner  went  lie  did 
not  know;  did  not  see  him  again  until  he  saw  him  going  toward  the 
jail  on  Monday. 
2e 


34  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

Mr.  Syester,  tor  the  defense,  then  handed  to  the  witness  the  follow- 
ing letter,  and  asked  him  to  state  to  the  jury  whether  or  np1  it  wu 
one  communicated  to  the  prisoner  on  the  day  before  the  shooting  : 

"Jfxe20,  18G6. 

44  My  Own  Dearest  :  I  will  make  an  al  tempi  1 1 1  answer  j  our  note 
jusl  received,  bu1  1  fear  I  shall  fail  before  I  gel  through.  Even  it'  1 
do,  I  shall  consider  the  time  well  spent.  I  unfortunately  took  a  drink 
the  other  day,  and  you  kiow  how  Iani  when  I  once  get  a  taste.  I 
cannot  stop  until  I  get  too  much,  and  thai  is  i;;<'  reason  I  did  not  lee 
you  when  you  were  out.  tins  morning.  !  was  upstreet  playing  cards 
and  drinking,  and  r  did  not  come  out  ttutil  3  o'clock  in  the  evening. 
[  had  a  very  good  time,  but  ten  to  one  would  sooner  have  been  with 
my  little  pet.  Oh  !  you  hard-hearted  little  thing!  bdwdare  yotitell 
me  that  I  am  losing  all  love  for  you?  It  is  not  that  1  love  you  the  less 
that  [  am  so  suspicious  of  you,  but  that  I  love  you  the  more  !  NOW, 
s's  no  use  for  you  trying  to  make  me  believethat  you  are  blind, 
because  I  know  you  well  enough  to  know  thai  you  see  already' too 
well,  and  you  knew  when  you  put  that  to  paper — that  1  did  not  want 
to  see  yon — that  you  w.  re  telling  what  you  know  to  be  a  lie.  I  swear 
(no,  I  won't  swear  either,)  because  you  say  thai  is  not  proper,  and  you 
know  I  try  to  do  everything  that  yon.  like,  bill  !  Will  be  dogged,  if  you 
let  this  opportunity  slip,  and  don't  spend  the  night  with  me  while  \  ou 
are  uptown,  I  shad  never  speak  to  you  again,  because  it  will  be  yx>ur 
fault  alone,  as  there  is  nothing  in  this  world  to  prevent  your  coming. 
All  you  will  have  to  do  is  to  bring  a  couple  of  thick  veils,  and  not  loop 
up  your  dress,  and  you  can  go  away  the  back  way  in  the  morning, 
and  nobody  will  be  the  wiser.  Now,  my  dear,  i  should  like  to  see 
you  before  the  place  is  closed,  so  that  we  can  understand  each  other, 
and  1  will  have  to  leave  that  tor  you 'to  arranges.  And  so,  good-bye, 
my  dear,  and  think  of  me  as  none  other  than  yours. 

" Forever. 

"If  you  read  this,  you  will  do  more  than  I  can." 

Mr.  Whitney  objected  to  this  letter  being  read  to  the  jury  for  the 
reason  that  the  defense  had  totally  failed  to  prove  its  genuineness 
That  being  written  in  pencil  and  afterwards  inked  over,  no  one  could 
pretend  to  say  in  whose  handwriting  it  was,  and  that  there  was  not  a 
particle  of  proof  in  the  ease  that  McKaig  ever  wrote  or  sent  it,  or  that 
Myra  Black  ever  received  it. 

Mr.  Voorhees  said  it  was  immaterial  whether  it  was  a  genuine  letter 
or  not,  provided  it  was  shown  to  be  a  communication  made  to  the 
prisoner. 

The  Court  allowed  the  letter  to  be  read. 

Witness  resumed:  It  is  the  same  letter  shown  to  the  prisoner  and 
read  by  him  on  the  Sunday  referred  to. 

Witness  then  read  the  letter  to  the  jury. 

Cross-examined  by  Mr.  Whitney,  for  the  prosecution. 

Mr.  Whitney.  Is  there  any  name  signed  to  that  letter? 

A.  There  is  no  signature  to  the' letter,  except  "Forever;"  there  is 
no  name  signed  to  it  ;  wil  ueSB  said  that  he  and  the  prisoner  were  talk- 
ing in  reference  to  preparing  the  defense  of  his  father  on  Sunday 
when  he  called  to  see  him ;  witness  told  him  that  his  information  and 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    m"k.\!<I,    JR.  35 

opinion  was  thai  McKaig  was  the  seducer  of  hifi  sister;  he  stated  it 
upon  the  ground  of  the  letter  and  upon  what  the  prisoner's  father  had 
told  liim.  and  what  lie  understood  from  (ho  family -and  Mr.  Black's 
friends.  Witness  gave  Black  the  names  of  certain  pari  ies  in  regard  to 
this  letter,  William  W.  McKaig  and  Judge  Pearle;  Black  came  to 
his  house  between  9  and  LO  o'clock';  did  not  know  t lmt  the  prisoner 
had  made  a  threat  to  shoot  McKaig  ;  went  to  Roman's  house  about  12 
o'clock;  found  the  prisoner  and  Mrs.  Roman  there;  don't  think  Mr. 
Roman  was  at  home  ;  saw  the  prisoner  on  Friday,  the  day  before  the 
father  was  presented  ;  did  not  hear  the  prisoner  say  anything  about  it ; 
witness  m*s1  heard  the  contents  of  the  letter  on  Friday  or  Saturday 
morning  before  the  shooting;  saw  it  on  Sunday;  read  i!  after  Black 
had  read  it;  Black  did  not  say  anything  about  Dhe  letter  after  he  read 
it,  but  seemed  much  excited  ;  (old  him  t  he  Idler  w  as  in  Mr.  Roman's 
possession  ;  how  it  eame  there  witness  docs  no!  know;  kn  sw  McKaig 
tor  about  three  years  ;  do  not  know  if  McKaig  was  a.  man  of  good  edu- 
cation, or  had  passed  through  college,  only  from  hearsay;  when  wit- 
ness first  saw  the  prisoner  Unit  day  he  had  not  read  the  letter,  only 
heard  of  it. 

John  M.  Jieslcy,  for  the  defense,  called. 

Examined  by  Mr.  Nelson. 
Q.  Did  you  ever  have  a  conversation  with  W.   W.   McKaig-,   Jr., 
about  a  letter  he  had  written  to  Miss  Myra  Black  ? 
WETNESS.    1  did. 

Mr.  Nklson.  State  what  that  conversation  was? 
Witness  slated  that,  McKaig  told  him  that  he  wrote  the  letter. 
Mr;  WirrTXKY.   1  object  to  any  declarations  of  the  deceased. 
The  Conn'.    By  Ibis  evidence  it  is   sought   to  identify  the  letter,  not 

that  it  was  communicated  to  the  prisoner,  but  to  couple  the  particular 
paper  already  offered  in  evidence  with  the  deceased. 

Mr.  WHITNEY.  l^>  we  understand  that  it  is  immaterial  whether  the 
letter  is  genuine  or  not  ? 

The  Court,  without  replying  to  the  interrogatory,  said  the  evidence. 
was  admissible  under  different  theories,  and  I  iiat  the  <  lourt  only  deter- 
mined it.  so  in  reference  to  its  legal  admissibility  to  prove,  the  issues  in 
tin-  cause. 

Mr.  Yookiiees.  We  withdraw  the  question  for  the  present. 

William  E.  Menahaw was  next  railed  for  the  defense  and  testified: 
I  live  at  the  Franklin  mines,  and  know  the  prisoner,  he  boards  with 
me.  1  am  not  positive  whether  he  reached  the  mines  on  his  return 
from  Cumberland  on  the  Friday  night  or  Saturday  morning  proceed- 
ing the  shooting;  I  remember  a  conversation  1  had  with  the  prisoner, 
at  the  Franklin  mines,  on  tin'  Saturday  evening  before  the  shooting, 
about  6  or  half-past  <;  on  the  afternoon  of  that  day;  Mr.  Black  was 
paying  off  thai  day  and  was  very  busy,  and  when  l  bad  an  opportunity 
to  speak  io  him  I  availed  myselfrof  it  ;  I  went  into  his  room  when  he 
came  into  supper  and  asked  him  if  the  grand  jury  had  indicted  his 
father;  he  said  tiny  had  not;  I  told  him  I.  was  glad  of  it ;  he  asked 
me  why  I  thought  he  would  be  indicted;  1  told  him  A.  Beall  McKaig 
bad  told  me  it  would  be  done;  he  said  he  had  not  been  able  to  Learn 
the  truth  of  what  had  happened  at  the  fair  ground,  as-  his  father  had 
been  in   no  condition   of  mind  for  him  to  a-k  about    it  ;   I   told  him 


3(5  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

also  that  I  had  beard  thai  at  the  fairgrounds  Colonel  McKaighad  ■'••- 

eed  his  sister  as  a  strumpet  ;  Ik-  said  "My  Cod.  is  ii  possil 
changed  color,  and  Beemed  much  excited  ;  I  then  left  him,  as  Khe  sub- 
jecl  seemed  very  painful  t<»  him  that  was  the  only  time  lever  men- 
tioned ii  to  him  :  I  do  nol  know  what  time  he  lefl  I  he  mines  that  night 
for  Cumberland;  I  think  the  trains  were  running  about  9o'clock. 
he  wore  lighl  pants  and  my  coat,  which  has  been  shown  here  as  his ; 
I  saw  ii  in  tin-  jail  the  night  of  the  day  the  shooting  took  place.  Mr. 
Black  was  in  the  habit  ■  >r  purchasing  for  the  miners  grain  at  Mr.  W.  L. 
Shaw's,  and  mostoftheoil  at  Mi'.  S.  C.  Shriyer's  ;  Black  must  have 
brought  to  Cumberland  about  $2,000;  it  was  put  in  an  envelope  and 
i  quite  a  large  package. 

Cross-examined  by  Mr.  Whitney: 

He  had,  I  suppose,  about  $2,000  after  paying  off  the  hands  :  he  sent, 
in  •  sheet  to  the  paymaster's  department,  rendering  in  it  an  account 

of  his  disbursements;  this  was  on  Saturday;  he  knew  on  Saturday 
that  his  sister  was  in  difficulty — which  was  October  the  15th;  I  also 
told  him  that  I  had  heard  of  something  that  had  occurred  on  the  fair 
grounds;  Black  replied  that  he  had  not  ascertained  the  facts  of  the 
affair  at  the  fair  grounds ;  I  had  heard  that  McCaig  had  threatened'  to 
shoot  Harry's  father. 

Mr.  Nelson,  Have  you  seen  anything  in  the  newspapers  about  the 
ilty  between  McKaigand  the  prisoner's  father? 

Witness.  1  do-recollect  of  seeing  something  in  the  papers;  I  take 
the  (  Cumberland  papers,  but  destroyed  them  to  keep  them  from  Harry's 
notice. 

The  next  witness  called  for  the  defense  was  Mrs.  Black,  the  mother 
of  the  prisoner.  She  approached  the  witness  stand  leaning-  on  the 
arm  of  her  husband,  Harrison  D.  Black,  and  every  eye  in  the  crowded 
assemblage  followed  her.  With  a  trembling  step  she  mounted  the 
Stand,  and  most  of  the  jurors  turned  and  faced  her.  She  was  evi- 
dently feeble  and  much  excited,  tier  husband  stood  "by  her  aa  she 
gave  her  testimony.  A  seat  was  given  her,  and  as  she  was  about  to 
give  her  testimony  she  raised  her  veil,  revealing  to  the  audience  a  coun- 
tenance which  indicated  her  the  possessor  of  intelligence  and  womanly 
attributes  far  above  the  ordinary  strata  of  feminine  humanity;  and, 
although  the  seal  of  intense  mental  suffering  had  left  its  heavy  impress 
upon  her  face,  it  had  not  obscured  in  il  the  traces  of  fine  personal 
appearance  ere  those  sorrows  came.  Her  face  is  regular  in  its  features, 
and  prepossessing  for  a  lady  of  her  age,  and  she  has  transmitted  to  her 
son  in  a  remarkable  degree  much  of  her  personnel.  She  gave  her  tes- 
timony in  a  clear,  distinct  manner,  except  when  her  feeling.-,  overcame 
her.  A1  these  times  she  placed  her  fan  to  her  face,  concealing  it  from 
the  gaze  of  the  crowd,  bowed  her  head,  and  seemed  deeply  affected. 
The  prisoner  was  greatly  moved  during  the  time  she  was  testifying, 
and,  leaning  over,  buried  his  face  in  his  hands,  and  wept  bitterly.  The 
most  respectful  silence  was  observed  while  Mrs.  Black  was  upon  the 
stand,  and  the  sympathies  of  all  were  moved  at  the  exliibitions  she 
gave  of  deep  and  earnest  feeling. 

Mr.  Syester,  tor  the  defense,  asked  her  if  she  was  the  mother  of  the 
prisoner.  In  a  clear  voice,  a  little  tremulous,  she  said,  "Yes,  sir;  he 
is  my  only  son." 


TOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    M'KAIG,    JR.  37 

By  Mr,  Svf.steb: 
Can  vmi  tell  the  j ury, what  time  he  dame  home  on  Saturday  night 
before  Colonel  McKaig  was  killed? — A.  lie  reachrd  liumc  about  11 
o'clock  that  night. 

By  Mr.  Svf.ster  : 

Stale,  if  you  please,  what  happened  the  next  day? 

A.  On  Sundaj  morning  he  went  up  town  as  usual,  after  getting  his 
breakfast;   he  always  goes  up  on  Sunday,  when  at  home,  to  see  his 
aunt;  I  knew  what  had  been  told  him ;  1  knew  he  had  been  told  all. 
[Here  Mrs.  Black  burst  into  tears.]     But  I  never  said  a  word  to  him 
about  it;  we  never  talked  about  the  matter  at  home ;  we  could  not 
talk  ab.mt  it.     [Again  Mrs.  Black  appeared  deeply  moved.]    On  Sun- 
day evening  Harry  came  home;   I  was  sick  in  bed  that  day;   he  was 
up  stairs  in  my  room,  lying  across  the  foot  of  my  bed ;  Mr.  Lowndes 
came  into  the  house  and  sent  up  word  that  he  desired  to  see  me  ;  1  sent 
him  word  that  1  was  side  and  could  not  see  him ;  he  replied  that  he 
must  see  me  ;  be  then  came  up  to  my  room,  and,  after  the  usual  salu- 
tation, asked  me  when-   Myra,  my  daughter,  was,  and  said  she  must 
come  home;   no  one  knew  where  Myra  was1  but  me  ;  even  her  father 
did  nut  know;  I  told  Mr.  Lowndes  thai  she  could  notcome  home:  he 
said  they  were  preparing  a  defense  for  Mr.  Black,  and  she  would  have 
to  come  as  a  witness  ;  1  told  him  she  must  not  come  home,  that  I  could 
nui  have  my  child  brought   upon  the  witness  stand  in  such  a  case  as 
this,  that  I  was  willing  to  risk  my  life  and  liberty  for  her  sake, and 
her  father  was  willing  to  do  the  same.    [~Sh~.  B.'s  feelings  nearly  over- 
came her  at   this  moment,  and  she  was  given  some  restoratives  to 
support  her.]    She  then  continued :  Mr.  Lowndes  asked  me  if  she  was 
nui   able  to  come  home;   I  told  him  she  was  in  good  health ;  [then 
told  him,  for  the  first  time  that  I  had  ever  told  any  one,  that  Myra  had 
given  birth  to  a  child  and  that  it  was  then  four  months  old ;  when  I 
told  him  this  my  son  fell  bark  on  the  bed  and  said  nothing;  this  was 
the  first  time  I  had  ever  told  him  his  sister  was  ruined.    Crawford, 
after  a  moment,  got  up,  went   into  the  hall  and  walked  up  and  down, 
as  Mr.  Lowndes  said;   when  Mr.  Lowndes  went   away  CraWford  went 
up  tow u  with  him  ;  he  came  back  in  the  evening  about  6  or  7  o'clo'ck ; 
later  in   the   eveuing  lie  went  to  bed;  he  sleeps  in  a  room  adjoining 
mine,  and  there  is  a  communicating  door  bet  ween  ;  just  before  he  vvenl 
to  bed  he  asked  me  if  I  felt  better,  l  told  him  not  much ;  he  is  a  i 
kind  and  loving  son,  and   never  likes  to  give  me  trouble,  (she  again 
burst  into  tears;)   (   heard  him  alter  he   retired,   up  and  down  all 
night;   i  do  not  think  he  slept ;  I  could  not,  and  1  know  lie  did   not; 
toward   morning — it  was  almost  daylight — he  came  into  my  room, 
threw  himself  upon  the  foot  of  my  bed,  and  asked  me  if  I  felt  better ; 
I  told  hi  in  ''yes;*1  he  then  went  back  into  his  room,  ami  I  knew  that 
he  had  fallen  asleep ;  I  did  not.  sleep  all  that   night;  on  the  evening 
before,  when  my  sou  cam''  home,  I  said,  "Crawford,  will  you  re 
to  the  mines  in  the  morning ;"  he  said  " yes."    In  the  morning  J 
up  and  went  down   stairs  quite  early;   I   knew  that  the  train    tor  the 
mine-  left  ai   7  o'clock,  but  I  knew  thai  Crawford  had  not,  slept  any, 
and  I  could  not    beat-   to  disturb  him  ;  about  7  o'clock  he  dressed  him- 
self and  came  down  stairs,  with  his  baton;  he  asked  me  what        i 
it  was;  1  told   him  nearly  7  o'clock,  and  that   it  was  too  late  logo  to 


33  TRIAL    OF    IIARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

the  mines  that  morning;  he  said  ii  did  nol  make  much  dlffi 
In'  bad  some  bills  yet  »o  pay  that  he  had  nol  paid  on  Saturday,  b 
asked  me  why  1  did  nol  call  bim  ;  1  told  him  I  did  nol  like  to  disturb 
him,  as  he  had  been  so  restless  the  nighl  before;  [  told  him  to  come 
to  his  brsakfast ;  he  said  he  did  not  want  anyfning  to  eal  :  I  begged 
him  to  cat  something ;  lie  said  he  could  not  eat ;  [asked  him  to  take 
a  cup  of  coffee;  he  sal  down  beside  me  at  the  table  with  his  hal  on, 
a  little  coffee  and  then  said  again  he  could  flol  eal  :  he  went  up 
and  got  his  overcoat,  and  then  came  down  ;  he  told  melt  was 
Mr.  Henshaw's  overcoat,  he  wbre  the  overeoal  because  he  ha  I  not  yet 
iged  his  summer  clothing ;  he  then  had  on  lig  pan  ■;  when  he 
started  down  the  street,  [  went  with  bim  tothe  lower  portico;  [always 
wenl  to  the  door  {here  she  evinced  greai  emotion;)  I  was  so  Lonely  and 
desolate;  I  had  lost  one  by  this  terrible  affair  and  perhaps  am 
would  be  taken  from  rile ;  I  could  not  bear  to  see  him  leave  me  (again 
she  shed  tears  and  was  greatly  agitated  ;)  I  was  afraid  to  see  htm  go  ; 
I  always  sat  and  watched  him  as  he  went  down  the  s'treet ;  it.  was  20 
minutes  or  half-pasl  7  o'clock  when  he  went;  I'went  down  tothe 
where  I  sat  to  watch  him,  and  looked  after  him  as  he  '.vent  a, way: 
I  had  never  before  this  told  himofthe  ruin  of  his  sister  by  Mr.  William 
Mi  Kaig;  I  was  afraid  to  tell  him;  1  had  heard  that  General  McKaig 
had  said  he  would  loose  three  nephews  in  thisallair;  when  he  w6nt 
}\p  town  he  always  went  up  Centre  street,  the  other  way  being  almost 
impassable. 

Mrs.  Black  was  not  submitted  to  a  cross-examination. 

Mr.  Syester  said  that  the  defense  would  now  rests  it  case. 

Mr.  Whitney  said  that  they  were  surprised  at  this  announcement, 
would  lake  a  moment  to  consult.     After  a  consultation  Mr.  Whit- 
ney said  they  would  now  call  rebutting  testimony. 

Lawrence  Dickinson,  for  the  prosecution,  was  called,  and  testified: 

de  in  Cumberland ;  it  is  my  native  place;    have  lived  there  from 

birth,  wii  h  the  exception  of  a  few  years  ;  1  knew  Myra  Black  slightly 

By  Mr.  Whitney  : 

Did  yon  know  the  general  reputation  of  Myra  Black  before,  during, 
and  after  the  war? 

Mr.  Voorhehs.  r  object,  and  am  astonished  at  this  attempt  fcointro- 
evidene'e  so  (dearly  inadmissible.  There  can  be  but  one  purpose, 
and  that  is  to 

Mr.  Wutt.vey.  I  am  able  to  state  tothe  Court  for  what  purpose  I 
seek  to  introduce  the  evidence. 

Mr.  Voorhehs.  The  purpose  is  perfectly  apparent  in  the  absurdity 
Of  the  proposition. 

Mr.  Whitney  replied  that  he  had  asked  the  question  under  a.  sense 
of  his  responsibility  as  a  sworn  officer  of  the  Court,  and  was  responsi- 
ble to  it  alone  for  his  action.  The  defense  having  offered  evidence  of 
communications  made  tothe  prisoner,  which  tended  to  show  the  con- 
dition of  his  mind  at  the  time  of  the  homicide,  he  claimed  it  competent 
for  the  Siate  to  show  that  the  reputation  of  Miss  Black  was  of  sucha 
bad  character  and  so  generally  known  in  the  community  of  which  the 
prisoner  was  a  member,  that  if  must  have  come  to  his  ears,  and  there- 
fore such  communications  could  not  have  operated  upon  his  mind  as 
claimed  by  the  defense. 


FOR   KILLING   COLONEL    W.    W.    m'kAIG,   JR.  39 

The  Court,  through  Chief  Justice  Maulsby,  said  it  was  competent 
for  (lie  State  to  reply  to  prool  as  to  i  he^onditioa pi'  the  pri  soner's  mind 
byuany  proof  going  to  the  prisoner's  mind  pp.  the  same  subject.  The 
feot  soughl  to  be  proved  could  have  no  Legal  connection  w  ith  the  facts 
in  this  issvc,  and  the  Court  is  of  the  opinion  that  the  evidence  oil'ercd, 
as  offered,  is  not  admissible* 

Henry  8hrwer^Jr.v  testified :  I  saw  Mr.  Black  at  Mr.  Qpodman's 
store  halt  an  hour  before  the  shooting;  he  bought  two  cigars,  and  left, 
my  store  smoking;  saw  nothing  unusual  about  him. 

Dr.  Smith,  for  the  prosecution,  called  :  I  reside  in  Cumberland,  but 
am  a  native  of  Frederick  county ;  have  resided  in  Cumberland  fifty- 
one  years ;  I  saw  Harry  Black  the  morning  of  the  occurrence  about  8 
o'clock;  [  was- returning  from  the  post-office, , and  observed  Black  on 
the  corner  at  llumoird's  store  ;  Black  crossed  over  to  the  oilier  side  ;  I 
heard  the  first  shot,  tired. 

Mr.  Whitney-.  Did  you  see  anything  in  McKaig's  hand? 

Mr.  Syk.stki:..  I  object.  This  certainly  cannot  be  considered  legiti- 
matc  cross-examination.  Th"  prosecution  have  closed  their  ease  so 
far  as  evidence  of  the  shooting  is  concerned. 

Mr.  Whitney  said  that  since  they  had  (dosed  their  case  the  plea  of 
Self-defense  had  been  set  up,  and  ihey  had  yet  had  no  opportunity  to 
combat  it.     He  contended  that  it  was  legitim  ite  rebutting  testimony. 

Mr.  Syestcrsaid  that  this  was  cutting  up  their  testimony  by  piece-meal, 
and  was  not  n  hutting  testimony.  II"  contended  that  it  was  evidence, 
in  chief,  and  that  When  the  plea  of  not  guilty  was  put  in  it  was  notice 
to  the  Stale  to  prove  their  case.  He  illustrated  their  position  by  say- 
ing that  if  after  the  Slate  had  closed  its  evidence  in  tjbe  first  ease,  and 
the  defense  had  submitted  it  on  that  evidence,  and  they  had  sought  to 
open  it  to  hit  roduce evidence  like  this,  would  it  have  been  allowed?  Mr. 
Syestor  cited  as  authorities  577  1st  Archibald's  Criminal  Evidence,  sec. 
44;  G-reenleaf  on  Evidence;  21st  Common  Law  Reports,  page  4-Jl. 
He  contended  that  the  prosecution  could  not  develop  a  pari  of  its  case 
and  then  rest  to  see  what  would  be  broughl  ooi  by  the  defense,  and 
then  bring  testimony  that  was  brought  here  for  the  express  purpose,  ot 
proving  their  case,  and  should  have  been  put  upon  the  stand  at  the 
opening  of  their  case. 

Mr.  Sye-ter  was  followed  by  Mr.  Brengle,  who  made  a  lengthy  argu- 
ment urging  the  admissibility  of  the  evidence  sought  to  be  offered. 

Mr.  Whitney  next  addressed  the  Court,  and  said  that  owing  to  the 
ab'r-ity  with  which  his  colleague  had  argued  the  question  it  was  un- 
necessary for  him  to  detain  the  Court  long.  He  said  that  self-defense 
isan  affirmative  defense,  and  necessary  to  be  proved  affirmatively,  to 
which  the  State  had  the  right  to  reply. 

Mr.  Nelson,  forthe  defense,  said  thai  the  State,  tor  the  purpose  of 
proving  this  identical  fact,  had  brought  Dv.  Smith  down  here,  and 
they  were  fully  aware  of  the  defense  when  they  rested  t  heir  case.  1  [e 
had  just  began  his  argument  when  the  Court  interrupted  and  said  that. 
it  was  the  hourfor  adjournment,  and  the  Court  would  adjourn  until 
Wednesday  morning  at  0  o'clock. 


40  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

SEVENTH  DAY. 

Argument  of  Mt.  .Y  Ibility  of  Evidena —  Deci- 

sion of  the  Court  upon  Hn  Point  Radaed-rRebutting  Evidence  Offered 
b'jthf  1'.  n—Th    Eoidenceon  Both  Sides  Closed* 

The  court  met  precisely  at  9  o'clock  a.  m.;  all  the  judges  and 
other  officers  of  the  court  iu  their  proper  places. 

There  was  no  lagging  of  interest  in  the  trial,  and  the  court-room 
.  if  possible,  mure  crowded  than  ever. 

The  decision  of  the  Court  upon  the  question  raised  on  Tuesday 
was  looked  for  with  great  anxiety  by  the  friends  of  both  parties,  as 
each  considi  red  it  of  the  greatest  importance  to  their  case. 

Immediately  upon  the  assembling  of  the  court,  Air.  Whitney 
said  that  before  the  counsel  for  the  defense  proceeded  he  desired 
to  submit  to  the  Court  their  proposition  in  writing,  as  follows: 
"The  (State  having  proved  tin?  killing  of  the  deceased  by  the 
prisoner,  and  offered  evidence  to  prove  express  malace,  (the 
counsel  for  the  defense  having  made  no  opening  statement) 
closed  their  case.  The  prisoner's  counsel  then  proceeded  to 
make  their  opening  statement  to  the  jury,  and  for  the  purpose 
of  establishing  the  theory  of  self-defense,  offered  evidence  to  show 
that  the  deceased,  at  the  time  of  the  shooting  and  afterwards, 
and  while  he  was  crossing  the  street,  had  a  pistol  in  his  hand. 
To  rebut  this  theory  of  self-defense  and  the  evidence  offered 
under  it,  as  above  stated,  the  State  proposes  to  prove  by  Dr. 
Smith  and  other  wit  nesses,  who  saw  the  deceased  during  the  time 
spoken  of  by  the  defendant's  witnesses,  that  he  had  no  pistol, 
and  that  the  allegation  made  by  the  defense  is  not  true." 

.Judge  Maulsby  suggested  that  the  question  in  the  case  was  not 
only  the  admissibility  of  the  fact  proposed  to  be  proved,  but  what 
is  the  evidence  by  which  it  is  proposed  to  prove  it. 

Air.  Whitney  withdrew  the  statement. 

Chief  Justice  Maulsby  directed  Mr,  Nelson,  for  the  defense,  to 
proceed  with  his  argument. 

AKGTMENT  OF  MR.  NELSON. 

Mr.  Nelson  said  that  when  the  court  adjourned  last  evening  we 
were  considering  the  question  whethertheeviden.ceoffered  was  in 
chief  or  rebuttal.  All  the  counsel  on  both  sides  have  come  to  the 
conclusion  as  to  the'  principles  of  law  governing,  the,  only  difficulty 
is  in  that  particular  application  to  this  case.  J  t  has  been  said  by 
the  prosecution  no  not  iceof  t  hedefense  nowset  up,  and  which  seems 
to  be  one  of  the  issues  in  this  case,  had  been  given  them,  and  also 
that  the  issues  in  reality  have  changed.  We  take  issue  on  both  alle- 
gations.    We  have  put  in  the  plea  of  not  guilty,  a  broad  plea. 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    M*KATC,    JR.  -11 

which  covers  all  the  defenses,  and  is  notice  to  the  State  of  eveisy 
defense  which  can  lie  made  use  of  under  such  a,  plea.  We  contend 
that  they  have  had  full  notice,  not  only  by  f  he  plea  put  in,  hut  that 
when  thiscase  occurred  in  Cumberland  it  was  stated  inthepubKc 
newspapers  of  thedaythat  a  pistol  had  been  found  lying  in  the 
street  near  the  deseased;  that  it  was  not  known  who  had  thai,  pis- 
tol1, the  deceased  or  the  prisoner.  Again,  our  line  Of  cross-exami- 
nation indicated  that  our  defense  wouhl  he  self-defense,  therefore 
the  excuse  that  they  had  no  no!  ice  will  not  hold.  Now,  upon  two 
grounds  we  submit  that  the  evidence  to  be  offered  is  not  compe- 
tent: First,  if  a  party  goes  into  a  case  and  offers  a  piece'bf  testi- 
mony, and  (doses  with  (die  expectation  of  offering  evidence  of  the 
same  class  after  the  evidence  i  closed,  tbat  is  certainly  not 

la.w,  as  you  will  see  by  reference  to  the  case  of  Brown  vs.  Murray, 
21st  Common  Law  Reports.  The  law  found  there  is  applicable  to 
t his  catee.  Witnesses  were  called  to  pfove  1  lie  tact  of  killing,  and 
further  offered  a  piece  of  evidence  which,  if  not.  tor  the  pui  pose  of 
self-defense,  had  no  legal  meaning,  to  wit,  whether  the  deceased 
did  not  throw  up  both  bands.  What  bearing  did  it  have  on  the 
killing V  vas  it  not  designed  to  create  the  impression  <>u  the 
mind  of  the  jury  that  the  deceased  had  no  pistol. or  arms,  and  for 
no  other  purpose?  If  that  is  so,  it  was  affirmative  testimony, 
which  we  had  the  right  to  the  ueg$tiye,and  which  denial  thej  are 
estopped  from  rebutting.  Another  proposition  weassume  is  that 
|r  thing  which|  occurred  around  this  whole  transaction  that 
would  go  to  conlirttfylt.li  e  theory  of  i  lie  State  mustbegiven  in  chief 
and  is  evidence  i^ehief.  For  instance,  in  a  robbery  the  State 
proves  the  fact  of  theft,  and  then  rests;  the  prisoner  comes  in, 
prove.,  an  alibi,  and  the  prosecution,  knowing  the  alibi  is  not  true, 
disproves  it  iu  the  first  place,  dan  they  disprove  it  again?  And 
in  cA<a  of  larceny  the  state  proves  possession  of  the  ai  ticle  stolen 

and  then  rests;  the  prisoner  conies  in  with  the  defense  thai  he 
purchased  ii.  Can  the  State  then  give  in  evidence  that  it  was 
stolen?  ( lertaiply  not,  and  L  refer  your  honor  toSCarrand  i'ayn, 
page  299;  24  English  Common  Law  Reports,  page  340;  thee, 
Rex  vs.  Hildige  et  at,  and  41  English  Common  Law  Reports,  page 
'J.~;\.  Again,  there  is  evidence  here  of  bullet  shots,  each  one 
sufficient  to  cause  death.  S  appose  the  state  had. proven  hut  one 
shot  and  then  closed,  and  the  defense  had  set  up  I  he  defense  that 
before  he  had  time  to  die  of  the  wound  inflicted  apoplexy  inter- 
vened, and  proven  by  medical  testimony  that  it  caused  death,  is 
ipetenl  to  reopen  the  case  aud  show5  that  a  second  shot  was 
fired  which  caused  heath'.''  That  is  no  answer  to  the  apoplexy. 
Can  it  be  allowed  t  >  break  down  the  defense  iti  that  manner?  We 
lipid  that  confirmatory  evidence  cannot  be  given,  as  it  is  original 
aony.  Upon  both  propositions  we  are  sustained  by  the 
authorities,  and  believe  that  we  may  rest  the  question  with  the 
Court. 

O tUX ION    OF    THE  COURT. 

Judge  Bowie,  for  himself  and  Judge  Lynch,  said  that  they  were 
of  the  opinion  that  the  evidence  sought  to  be  introduced  bj  the 
State  was  admissible,  and  added  that  the  traverser  in  his  defense 


42  TRIAL    OF   HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

proved  thai  when  he  fired  the  fatal  shot  the  deceased  had  a  r 
ver  in  his  hand,  which  fell  in  the  street,  and  closed  his  testimony 
in  chief.    The  state  produced  a  witn<  ss,  who  was  present  al  the 
time  of  the  homicide,  to  prove  thai  the  deceased  had  n  ■ 

srser  objected.    The1  majority  of  i:"'  eourl   are  of  the 
opinion  that  the  evideace  is  admissible,  because  it  is  in  rebuttal 
of  the  testimony  of  the  i  raverser  tending  to  establish, self -defi 
The  State  must  in  the  first  in  five, evidence  of  all  the  J 

relied  on  to  prove  t  he  offense,  and  will  ■  '.  ;    .  er  the 

traverser  has  concluded,  1  >introdu  •  in  rebuttal  any.cuuiul 
evidence  to  establish  the  facts  which  the  law  demands  the  : 
to  prove  in  chief,  and  will  not  be  permitted  to  3  and  rebut 

matter  proper  to  be -given  int  evidence  in  defense.  The  tra- 
verser will  be  required  to  give;in  evidence  allfacts  relied  on  as 
matter  of  defense.  When  thedefense  has  done  with  its  evidence 
theStatewill  be  permitted  to  rebut  by  evidence  ;in\  fact  inl  roduced 
in  the  defense  as  new  matter,  and  this  whether  it  be  a  part  of  1  he 
occurrence  at  tbe  time  of  the  homicide  or  otherwise;  that  this 
self-di  fense  is  a  .matter  of  confession  and  avoidance  and  affirma- 
tion on  the  part  of  the  defense;  which  it  is  proper  should  be 
rebutted,  and  that, in  our  opinion,  the  authorities  read  by  the  tra- 
verser's counsel  do  not  sustain  their  theory. 

.TFDGE  MATJLSBY  DISSENTS. 

Chief  Justice  Maulsby  expressed  his  regret  at  being  compelled, 
by  a  sense  of  official  duty,  to  differ  from  his  brethren  of  1  he  bench, 
for  the  first  time  since  he  had  the  pleasure  of  occupying  it  with 
them,  and  his  thanks  to  the  counsel  of  defense  for  the  arguments 
by  which  he  had  been  convinced  that  his  first  impressions  in  fa  t  or 
Of  the  admissibility  of  the  evidence  offered  were  erroneous.  lie 
then  read  from  1st Greenleaf ,  section  74.  to  the  effect  tiiat  a  p  1 
who  asserts  the  affirmative  of  an  issue  is  entitled  to  begin  and 
reply,  and  having  begun,  is  not  permitted  to  go  into  half  of  his 
ease,  and  resume  1  hi;  remainder,  but  is  generally  obliged  I  0  develop 
the  whole,  regard  being  had  to  the  substance  and  effectof  the 
issue  rather  than  to  the  form  of  it,  the  test  being  whether  the 
defense  is  indicated  with  sufficient  particularity to  render  the 
plaintiff's  evidence  intelligible,  and  to  note  J>  to  section  81,  to 
the  point  that  in  criminal  cases  I  he  burden  of  proof  never  shifts, 
but  is  on  the  State  throughout,  and  that  the  State  is  bound  to 
prove  that  the  prisoner  is  guilty  in  mariner  and  farm  as  charged  in 
the  indictment;  and  to  section  469,  that  the  State  must  put  in  its 
whole  evidence  to  every  point  on  which  it  opens,  and  then  the 
prisoner  must  put  in  his  entire  case,  and  the  State's  reply  must  be 
limited  to  new  points  first  opened  by  the  defense.  He  referred 
to  1st  Carrington  and  Murshnian,  500;  2d  Uarrington  and  Payne, 
41o,  and  Kyan  and  Moody,  254.  The  principle  announced  in  the 
last  case  is  that  when  but  one  transaction  is  in  question  the  party 
maintaining  the  affirmative  must  put  in  chief  all  the  evidence 
relating  to  that  transaction,  and  will  not  be  allowed  to  give  in 
reply  any  evidence  relative  to  that  transaction. 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    M'KAIG,    JR.  43 

Tho  application  of  the  law  so  stated  to  this  case  he,  made  as  fol- 
lows:'That  the  State  had  proved  in  chief  thetransaction  resulting 
in  the  killling — the  meeting  of  the  parties;  their  attitudes  toward 
carl)  other,  the  firing,  the  fatal  shot,  the  fall,  the  death.  &c, 
Tie  said  that  the  state  was  bound  in  law  to  offer  in  chief  all  the 
facts  of  that  transaction,  and  eon  hi  not  prove  in  chief  some  of  the 
faeis,  ami,  in  reply,  other  of  tin-  facts  of  thai  onet  ransaction;  that 
is,  the  staie  was  bound  to  give  in  chief  all  the  evidence  pertain- 
ing to  that  transaction,  So  as  to  describe  it  fully  according  to  its 
real  character.  Having  close!]  its  proof,  the  defense  produced 
evidence  describing  the  same  tra  tsactiou  in  a  different  manner, 
and  had  stated  some  facts  attending  the  transaction  which  the 
State's  witnesses  had  not  described  to  exist,  as  the  having  in  his 
hand  by  the  deceased  a  revolver  at  the  time  when  the,  prisoner 
fired  the  fatal  shot.  N"ow,  the  State  offers  to  call  in  reply  other 
witnesses  to  describe  the  same  t  ran  sad  ion,  and  to  prove  that  t  hey 
did  not  see  the  revolver  in  the  deceased's  hands.  He  thought 
that  this  would  be  merely  to  repeat  the  evidence  in  chief,  to  prove 
the  same  description  of  the  transaction  which  the  Slate  had 
pfoved  in  chief.  The  admissibility  of  the  proof  offered  in  reply, 
lie  said,  was  supposed  to  vest  on  this:  That  the  State  had  not 
proved  in  chief  the  fact  of  the  deceased  not  having  a,  revolver  iii 
his  hand,  and  the  defence  having  proved  the  fact  that  he  did  have 
it,  that  was  a  new  fact  proved  by  the  defense  which  entitled  the 
Stal(!  to  reply  to  it  by  proving  that  it  was  not  so.  This,  the  judge 
said,  was  confounding  facts  proved  on  each  side  of  an  issue  with 
the  evidence  ow  each  side.  That  is,  the  evidence  to  a  transaction 
embraces  all  the  fads  attending  it,  and  all  the  evidence  be 
required  to  he  pal  in  and  then  replied  to.  The  evidence  so  gj 
on  both  side's  went  to  (lie  jury  to  enable  them  to  determine  what 
the  facts  of  the  trans. ict  ions  were  which  the  evidence  proved.  If 
the  doctrdrie  contended  for  could  be  correct  then  each  sepai 
fact  could  lie  proved  by  the  evidence  on  both  sides  to  that  fact, 
which  was  b  il  one  Of  the  many  facts  attending  the  narrative  of 
one  transaction,  and  so  the  issues  and  the  order  of  process  on 
them  would  be  multiplied  ad  infinitum,  each  fact  attending  the 
principal  fact  forming  a  seperate  issue,  so  far  as  the  ordinary  proof 
was  concerned.  The  proof  offered  could  only  be  to  prove  all  the 
facts,  ^r  some  of  the  fa.ci  -  tding  the  one  transaction  already 

proved  by  the  State  in  chief,  and  wasrqu  ally  inadmissible  whether 

it  were  simply  to  repeat  testimony  given  in  chief,  to  prove  the 
same  fact ,  or  to  prove  some  of  the  fad s  of  t he  affair,  ail  6f  which 

the  State  had  proved,  or  was  bound  to  have  proved  in  chief.  The 
result,  would  be  that  when  a  party  proved  his  side  of  an  issue,  and 
the  Opposite  side  proved  his  version  of  the  same  matter,  without 
introducing  any  new  collate  red  fact,  but  simply  proving  the  same 
affair  to  be  different  from  what  the  first  party  have  proved  it  to 
be;  tin;  fijoat  party  could  have  the  last  only, by  calling  other  wit- 
nesses to  prove  that  it  was  as  his  witnesses  had  first  proved  it, 
and  not  as  the  defendant's  witnesses  had  proved  il.  This  was  not 
the  law  of  evidence. 

lie  said  that  if  the  defense  had   proved  any  new  fact  collateral 
to  the  transaction,  or  disconnected  and  apart  from  it  in  respect  to 


44  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

the  tenor  of  its  occurrence,  the  State  would  be  at  liberty  to  offer 
»f  in  reply  in  respect  to  i bat  colateral  fact.    But  that  was  not 
this  case  and  he  thought  the  proof  offered  in  reply  was  clearly 
inadmissible. 

Dr.  s.  p.  Smith  recalled  for  the  prosecution:  I  saw  McKaig 
almost  simultaneously  at  the  time  of  the  firsl  shot;  saw  the 
Bmoke  when  not  much  higherthana  man's  head:  saw  his  hands 
distinctly;  he  hadno  pistol  in  his  hand, and  saw  none  till  the 
lime  the  body  was  taken  up;  1  was  at  no  time  more  than  nine 
steps  from  him,  sometimes  not  more  than  live;  I  saw  the  body 
in  the  office,  and  assisted  in  carrying  it  in;  I  know  Ch 
Medore;  my  impression  is  Charles  Medore  did  not  unbuckle  the 
belt;  I  would  not  allow  any  person  to  gq  to  the  body  until  his 
friends  came;  I  told  the  brother  of  the  deceased, when  he  came, 
to  take  everything  into  his  possession;  lie,  in  opening  the  vest,. 
disclosed  the  belt;  [did  not  see  the  belt  before  then,  as  it  was 
covered  by  the  vest;  there  was  one  pistol  in  the  holster  fastened 
d>\vu  by  a  flap  buttoned;  the  other  holster  was  empty;  perhaps 
Medore  assisted  in  removing  the  body;  there  was  no  obstruction 
between  the  body  and  myself,  hut  I  had  an  unobstructed  view; 
my  eye-,  were  on  him  (McKaig)  from  the  first  lire. 

Mr.  Whitney:  What  was  W.  W.  KcKaig's  character? 

Mr.  Syester  objected. 

Mr.  Whitney  stated  that  the  defense  had  offered  testimony  as 
to  the  character  of  Black  for  peace  and  quietness!  under  the  theory 
that  he  acted  in  self-defense,  and  the  killing  was  the  result  of  a 
mutual  rencontre,  to  show  the  improbability  otitis  having  made  t  he 
first  at  lack.  To  meet  this  theory  the  State  now  proposes  to  prove 
the  good  character  of  McKaig  for  peace  and  quietness  to  establish 
improbability  of  his  having'  made  the  first  attack,  as  assumed. 
The  Court  sustained  Mr.  Syester 's  objection,  and  the  Court  ex- 
cluded the  testimony. 

Cross-examination  by  Mr,  Syester: 

His  body  was  in  the  office,  but  how  long  I  know  not;  I  think 
there  were  three  or  four  persons  present ;  they  were  not  strangers, 
but  1  bave  forgotten  who  they  wen  ;  when  L  saw  McKaig  he  was 
down  off  of  the  pavement,  out  of  the  gutter,  backing  into  the 
street,  witii  face  obliquely  from  me,  and  his  hands  up  in  an  im- 
ploring position;  1  do  not  say  Medore  was  in  or  out  of  the  office, 
as  the  crowd  there  became  large  very  soon;  the  people  living  in 


hotly  was  untouched  unlit  Mervin  McKaig  came,  Which  was  in 
about  fifteen  or  twenty  minutes;  I  examined  the  body;  I  did  not 
see  pockets  in  the  rear  of  his  pantaloons,  or  any  pocket  torn  out; 
Mervin  McKaig  unbuttoned  the  vest  and  unbuckled  the  belt;  he 
opened  his  vest  at  my  suggestion  to  take  out  his  brother's  papers 
and  valuables,  and  then  it  was  I  saw  the  belt;  I  can't  say  whe.ro 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL   W.    W.    m'kAIGF,   JR.  45 

the  belt  was  located,  only  abbut  the  waist;  can't  locate  the  par- 
ticular spot;  one,  of  the  holsters  was  empty,  the  one  that  had  the 
flap  torn  off ;  the  pistol  was  ptil  into  the  holster  byMervin  Mc- 
Kaig  and  the  belt  buckled  about  himself;  when  he  went  away  he 
took  t  he  pistol  with  him;  I  came  up  street  that  morning,  but  not 
certain  from  where,  may  have  been  to  other  places  than  the  post- 
office;  the  body  when  brought  into  the  oil  ice  was  laid  on  a  set  lee; 
the  vest  was  not- opened',  that  I  know  of,  before  Mervin  McKaig 
eanie;   I  I'orhade  any  person  to  go  near  the  body. 

.'.  Edfiehl  next  called  and  examined  by  Mr.  Whitney:  I  reside 
in  Cumberland,  but  am  originally  from  Pennsylvania.  1  am  clerk- 
ing  in  Craigen  &  Co.'s  drug  s'tere;  1  saw  where  the  body  of  Mc- 
Kaig  lay,  and  saw  it  raised  up  to  betaken  in  the  office;  as  it  was 
raised  up  I  saw  a  revolver  l'all  from  the  bod)-;  I  don't  know  Who 
picked  it  up;  it  lay  about  a  foot  from  him;  I  saw  Black  after  the 
shooting;  he  stepped  back  on  the  pavement  with  a  revbiver-irt  his 
hand;  I  saw  McKsaig  as  lie  was  falling,  jnst  about  toucbingtbe 
ground;  as  the  body  was  carried  to  the  oliice  I  followed,  I  did  not 
see  any  one  pick  up  a  pistol. 

Cross-examined  by  Mr.  Sykstek: 
As  his  head  was  raised  up  a  pistol  fell  from  the  left  side;  I  did 
not  see  the  whole  of  the  transaction;  I  heard  only  t  hree  shots;  I 
was  engaged  in  conversation  with  another  gentleman  and  could, 
1  think,  have  heard  the  other  report  if  it  had  been  as  loud  as  the 
rest;  I  don't  remember  of  having  had  a  conversation  immediately 
after  the  shooting  with  Mr.  Mickey;  I  often  have  conversations 
With  Mr.  Mickey,  as  he  is  one  of  the  firm  in  whose  store  I  stand. 

Mr.  Gahitt  called  and  examined  by  Mr.  Whitney:  T  was  not  ex- 
actly present  when  the  body  was  taken  up,  but  I  was  running 
toward  if;  I  saw  something  fall  and  I  was  impressed  that  it 
was  a  pistol;  it  was  picked  up  by  Mr.  Turney  near  the  body, 
which  1  saw. 

Dr.  Smith  was  recalled:  One  of  the  holsters  was  buckled  up  with 
a  pistol  in  it;  the  other  was  empty  and  the  flap  cut  off. 

Mr.  Mori  fund  called  and  examined  by  Mr.  Whitney:  I  am  the 
party  who  assisted  in  picking  up  the  body  of  McKaig;  L  live  in 
Cumberland  and  was  in  my  store  on  that  morning;  as  I  raised 
the  body  up  it  is  my  impression  that  something  jingled  on  the 
stones  of  the  street,  1  did  not  stop  to  look  at  it  or  pick  it  up,  but 
continued  on  carrying  the  body  in  the  office;  in  raising  the  body 
up  the  coat  hung  down  so  as  to  obstruct,  my  view;  L  saw  McKaig 
from  the  time  he  was  on  the  opposite  side  of  the  street  from  Black 
until  lie  was  killed. 

Cross-examined  by  Mr.  Stestbr  : 

I  was  Loading  a  dray  with  a  stove  and  furniture;  had  got  the 
stove  on  and  had  gone  into  the  store  to  get  the  furniture  when  I 
heard  the  first  shot  fired. 


46  TRIAL   OF   HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLAi 

6  orge  M.  Gross  called  and  examined  by  Mr.  Whitney:  I  was  up 
stairs  above  Mr.  Morehead's  store,  looking  out  the  window  when 
the  I  McKaig  was  picked  up;  I  sawa  pistol  picked  up  by 

Mr.  Turney,  near  the  body,  about  the  middle  of  the  street. 

Cross-examined  by  Mr.  Syester: 

I  am  the  same  witness  who  was  up  before,  and  was  prevented 
by  counsel  from  stating  this  fact  before. 

Mr.  Syestek:  Was  that  the  reason  you  did  not  swear  to  the 
whole  truth  as  you  now  swear? 

Witness.  Yes;  sir. 

W.  3f.  Buckholdtz  called  and  examined  by  Mr.  "Whitney:  I  was 
in  the  store  door  of  Ciabaugh  &  Ryans,  in  Cumberland,  on  the 
morning  of  theshooting;  the  store  is  near  the  bridge;  the  diagram 
shown  me  represents  the  door  correctly;  T  was  at  the  store  door 

after  the  first  shot,  tint  not  at  the  time  it  occurred;  I  only  saw 
Dr.  Smith  on  the  opposite  side  of  the  street;  Mi'.  Connor  was  in 
the  store;  Dr.  Himmelshine  had  been  there,  hut  had  gone  out';  I 
sa.w  no  colored  man  there  or  about  the  place;  [did  not  see  Mr. 
Connor  come  in  the  store,  but  I  am  certain  he  was  at  the  water- 
cooler  when  the  first  shot  was  fired. 
No  cross-examination. 

Dr.  Dougherty  called:  T  was  not  in  Dr.  Ilealy'ssbop  when  the  body 
was  Drought  in,  but  about  fifteen  minutes  after  it  had  been  placed 
there;  Mervin  McKaig  opened  the  vest;  Dr.  Smith  called  his  at- 
tention to  the  belt,  and  he  unbuckled  it,  and  put  it  around  his  own 
body;  I  am  acquainted  with  the  localities  at  the  Revere  House, 
and  made  an  examination  of  them  yesterday  and  last  night;  there 
is  a,  verandah  attached  to  the  hotel;  the  Revere  House  stands  on 
a  line  of  six  feet  behind  the  Green  House  below  it;  the  verandah 
extends  about  two  feet  from  the  hotel;  standing  at  the  corner  of 
the  hotel  you  can  only  see  the  outside  of  Little's  sign  near  the  end 
of  pavement,  and  then  must  leak  through  an  opening  in  the  rail- 
ing of  the  verandah;  the  Green  House  and  railing  obstruct  the 
view;  you  might  recognize  a  man  in  broad  daylight  from  the  cor- 
ner; I  made  an  examination  last  night;  could  see  the  light,  but 
could  not  distinguish  any  person  passing  by  it;  a  friend  of  mine 
went  over  to  l  lie  corner  to  try  ir,  and  it  is  impossible  to  recognize 
any  person  standing  at  the  Revere  House;  the  light  at  the  railroad 
ticket  office  at  the  Revere  House  throws  alight  into  the  street, 
and  leaves  a  person  standing  by  it  in  the  shade,  rendering  it  im- 
possible to  distinguish  whether  it  is  a  white  or  black  man. 

Mr.  Whitney.  Do  you  know  the  general  character  of  John 
Long? 

Objection  being  made  by  Mr.  Nelson,  the  question  was  with- 
drawn. 

Cross-examination  by  Mr.  Syester  : 
I  made  the  examination  yesterday,  and  this  is  my  first  visit  to 


FOR    KILLINO    COLONEL    W.    W.    m"kAIG,    JR.  47 

Frederick  during  this  trial;  T  made  the  exnvnination  at  the  request 
of  Smith  Johnson,  who  asked  me  to  go  with  him;  he  said,  l'Hid 
yon  see  John  Long's  testimony?"  I  replied  "yes.11 

[The  witness  was  here  going  to  express  an  opinion  about  the  tes- 
timony, when  he  was  stopped  by  the  defense.] 

The  witness  then  continued:  The  Revere  House  is  about  six 
feet  in  tii''  rear  of  the  Green  House;  the  Green  House  is  a  saloon, 
and  has,  I  think,  two  windows  in  front,  and  oval  glasses  in  the 
door,  though  I  do  not  know  for  certain,  as  1  do  not  visit  such 
places;  I  could  not  see  because  the  verandah  obscured  the  view; 
there  is  a  barber-shop  under  the  Kevere  House,  and  if  you  look 
under  the  verandah  you  can  see  the  entrance  to  it;  the  verandah 
runs  nearly  up  to  the  corner,  and  is  about  six  feet  high;  the  rail- 
ing around  it  about:,  two  and  a  half  feet  from  the  floor;  the  plat- 
form descends,  and  you  must  dodge  down  in  order  to  see  under 
the  verandah;  there  is  generally  a  light  hanging  out  of  the  Green 
House;  (here  is  a  light  at  Ferguson's  saloon;  the  saloon  stands  on 
a  hue  with  the  Green  House;  the  Green  House  isabove  Ferguson's; 
there  is  a  little  alley  between  the  Revere  House  and  the  Green 
House;  there  is  a  saloon  under  the  Revere  House;  next,  1  think, 
the  Green  House;  I  think  there  is  a  lamp-post  in  front  of  the  Re- 
vere House,  but  no  lamp;  there  is  no  light  in  front  of  the  barber- 
shop; I  have  not  been  extraordinarily  active  in  this  case;  the  lamp 
in  front  of  Ferguson's  saloon  is  a  large  one,  but  1  don't  think  it 
was  lighted  up;  one  also  at  the  Green  House,  which  was  not  lighted 
Up,  nor  the  one  at  the  other  saloons. 

ftfr.  Sykstek.  Why  did  you  make  the  examination  without  hav- 
ing the  lamps  lighted? 

Witness.  Because  I  made  it  in  broad  daylight,  both  in  the 
morning  and  afternoon;  1  made  it  first  by  myself,  and  then  in  the 
afternoon  with  Mr.  Johnson,  at  his  request;  I  don't  think  [  could 
have  recognized  any  person  from  the  corner  of  the  Revere  House 
coming  up  the  street,  as  the  opening  to  look  through  the  veran- 
dah is  only  about  three  inches  wide;  1  did  not  send  any  person 
down  to  walk  up,  as  1  thought  it  not  necessary;  the  strongest 
lights,  if  lighted,  would  be  in  the  rear  of  anyone  walking  up 
street,  and  not  in  front;  the  dim  ones  would  be  in  front;  L  have 
not  taken  an  unusual  amount  of  interest  in  this  case;  what  inter- 
est 1  have  taken  is  caused  by  my  opinion  that  an  outrage  had  been 
committed  in  the  community  by  shooting;  I  did  look  up  some  testi- 
mony, because  once  1  became  near  being  murdered  without  cause 
in  the  same  way. 

Re-examined  by  Mr.  June  : 

I  have  lived  in  Cumberland  twenty-five  years,  and  practiced 
medicine  there  twenty-four  years;  I  interested  myself  in  this  case 
only  as  a  good  citizen  should  do,  and  denounced  it  in  the  office 
v.  here  the  body  lay;  my  Life  was  threatened  without  a  cause  once, 
on  political  grounds,  not  that  anj  thing  of  this  character  was  im- 
puted to  me;  John  Resley  attempted  it,  and  the  sheriff  caught  the 
pistol  from  him;  i  myself  had  heard  of  Ins  threats,  and  meeting 


43  TRIAL   OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

liim  took  a  pistol  out,  and  laying  it  in  my  hands,  Baid  to  him  that 
T  was  prepared  for  him,  likewise  that  I  had  heard  of  his  threats; 
the  sheriff  took  the  pistol  from  John  which  he  had;  he  is  a  desper- 
ate young  man. 

Mr.  Syester,  Did  John  Resley  have  a  pistol  in  his  hands  when 
you  pulled  your  pistol  out? 

V.  ri  n  ESS.    I  saw  none. 

Mr.  Syester.  Thai  isthe  way  your  life  was  threatened,  is  it? 

Witness.  Yes.  sir. 

Smith  Johnson  caller!  and  examined  by  Mr.  Whitney :  T  heard 
John  Long's  testimony;  T  partly  examined  the  locality;  the  ticket 
office  was  lighted  when  f  examined  it  last;  by  the  light  it  was 
impossible  to  tell  a  pistol  or  gun;  I  leaned  against  the  corner  and 
looked  towards  Mr.  Little's,  down  street;  [.had  to  look  through 
the  verandah,  which  so  obstructed  my  view  that  I  could  not  recog- 
nize any  one  at  Little's  store. 

Cross-examination  by  Mr.  Syester: 

I  left  here  on  Saturday  evening  at  7  o'clock;  did  not  leave  for 
thepurposeof  making  the  examination,  but  to  go  home  to  Cum- 
berland;  I  first  went  down  to  the  Revere  House  on  Sunday  at  10 
o'clock,  to  examine  the  locality  Long  testified  to,  and  again  on 
Monday  at  1  p.  m.;the  first  time  I  went  alone;  the  second  time 
with  Dr.  Dougherty;  I  made  three  examinations,  the  last  this 
morning  at  2  o'clock,  when  I  left  Cumberland  for  Federick;  I  did 
not  look  down  street  then;  Dr.  Dougherty  and  John  Cruzin  were 
there,  helping  to  make  the  examination;  Cruzin  came  there  not  by 
my  request;  lie  said  he  had  heard  that  the  money  drawer  of  the 
Revere  House  had  been  broken  open,  and  the  money  had  been 
I  ii.  and  he  came  up  to  see  about  it;  lie  heard  it  when  they  came 
to  his  saloon  for  a  policeman ;  I  have  been  in  Cumberland  seven  or 
eight  years;  1  am  engaged  in  the  coal  business  and  Kfe  insurance 
and  real  estate  agency;  I  may  have  been  active  in  this  case;  Imay 
have  been  looking  after  witnesses,  and  may  have  asked  some  of 
them  what  they  knew;  I  told  Mr.  Benan  that  Mr.  Whitney  or  Mr. 
McKaig  wanted  to  see  him;  but  he  did  not  go;  he  is  the  only  one 
I  asked  to  go;  I  did  not  ask  any  of  the  witnesses  for  the  defense 
what  they  would  prove;  I  was  at  the  place  of  shooting  half  an 
hour  after  it  occurred,  and  did  not  use  much  intemperate  langu- 
age; I  have  not  offered  t<>  bettbat  the  prisoner  would  be  convicted 
and  hung;  some  one  said  that  he  would  bet  two  to  one  that  the 
prisoner  would  be  acquitted^  which  1  said  I  would  take,  but  there 
was  no  bet;  I  had  not  inquired  into  any  of  the  privacies  of  this 
case  before  returning  to  Cumberland. 

Dr.  Ileal y  called  and  examined  by  Mr.  Whitney:  T  called  Dr. 
Smith's  attention  to  the  shooting;  1  was  sitting  in  the  ollice  win- 
dow waiting  for  my  horse;  L  am  lame  and  can't  walk  much,  there- 
fore use  a  horse;  while  sitting  there  I  observed  the  two  gentlemen. 


FOR    BILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    M*KAIG,    JR.  49 

Mr.  MoKaigand  Mr.  Black;  T  kept  my  eye  on  them;  I  saw  Mr. 
McKaig's  hand;  there  was  no  pistol  in  it. 

Mr.  Syester  objected  to  the  testimony,  as  he  had  been  examined 
in  chief  to  the  same,  thing,  and  said  he  himself  asked  the  questions 
on  cross-examination,  and  that  the  witness  replied  that  such  "was 
his  position  that  it  was  impossible  to  see  a  pistol  in  McKaig's 
hand  if  there  was  one. 

WITNESS.  Mr.  Syester.  T  made  no  such  statement  as  that,  and 
don't  recollect  having  said  anything  about  it  yesterday,  though  1 
might. 

Mr.  Syester  contended  that  an  examination  had  linen  made  be- 
fore on  the  same  tiling, and  produced  notesof  a  reporter  to  sustain 
himself.    The  Court  ruled  the  question  not  proper. 

Dr.  Ilealy  resumed  his  testimony:  I  conversed  with  Mr.  Wolfe 
several  times  about  it;  Mr.  Wolfe" never  said  he  saw  a  pistol  in 
McKaig's  hand;  Mr.  Wolfe  told  me  he  never  did  see  one  in  his 
hand. 

Mr.  kelson  objected  to  the  last  answer,  as  it  tended  to  impeach 
Mr.  Wolfe,  and  a  proper  foundation  had  not  been  laid. 

The  Court  ruled  the  answer  inadmissible. 

Witness.  I  never  heard  of  a  pistol  being  in  McKaig's  hands 
until  I  came  to  Frederick. 

Cornelius  Cornier  was  called  and  examined  by  Mr.  Whitney:  I 
was  walking  to  the  liquor  establishment  of  Clabaugh  &  Ryan,  and 
MeKaig passed  as  I  went  into  it;  was  in  about  one  or  one-and-a- 
half  minutes  when  the  shot  was  fired;  had  just  cleverly  got  in 
and  immediately  came  out;  I  did  not  see  a  colored  man  there  or 
about;  I  sawCnly  Dr.  Ilummelshine  and  Mr.  Buckholtz. 

Andrew  Goneler  called  and  examined  by  Mr.  Brengle:  I  know 
when  MeKaig  was  shot  by  Mr.  Black,  Sr. 

Mr.  Syester.  We  object  to  that,  as  it  does  not  rebut  anything 
given  in  evidence  by  the  defense. 

Mr.  Whitnry  said  the  defense  had  offered  Lloyd  Lowndes  as  a 
witness  to  prove  that  the  fact  of  MeKaig  being  the  seducer  of 
Black's  sister  was  first  communicated  to  him  on  the  Sunday  pro- 
ceeding thekilling.  The  state,  for  thepurpose  of  showing  this  tes- 
timony untrue  and  absurd,  proposes  to  prove  by  this  witness  that 
some  four  mouths  prior  to  this  murder  Black's  father  had  shot 
and  severely  wounded  MeKaig  with  a  double-barrelled  gun  on  one 
of  the  principal  streets  of  Cumberland,  for  the  very  same  cause  now 
set  up  by  the  son;  that  Black,  Sr.,  was  arrested  at  the  time  tor  an 
assult  with  intent  to  murder,  failed  to  appear  before  the  grand 
jury,  and  the  whole  affair  published  in  the  three  Cumberland 
papers  ;  that  the  jury,  as  sensible  men,  could  draw  no  other  con- 
clusion but  that  young $>lack,  who  was  there  at  the  time,  must 
have  known  of  the  shooting  and  its  alleged  cause. 

The  Court.  Do  you  further  proposeto  inquire  when  the  fact  was 
conveyed  to  the  prisoner? 

4e 


50  TRIAL   OF   HARRY   CRAWFORD   BLACK. 

The  counsel  for  the  prosecution  consulted  for  a  moment,  when 
Mr.  Brengle  arose  and  said  the  State  would  now  rest  its  case. 

The  counsel  Col  t  he  defense,  after  a  short  consultation,  staled 
they  would  also  close,  at  which  announcement  there  was  quite  a 
feeling  of  suprise  manifest  among  the  audience. 

Chief  Justice  Maulsby  stated  that  the  Court  would  adjourn 
until  Wednesday  morning,  at  9  o'clock,  when  the  arguments  would 
he  heard. 


ARGUMENT 

OF 

ATTORNEY  GENERAL  JONES. 


Mav  it  please  the  Coubt  and  Gentlemen  of  the  Jury, 
in  the  discbarge  of  the  responsible  duty  which  my  official  position 
imposes  upon  me,  I  desire  to  address  you  in  plain  words.  I  wish 
to  impress  upon  you  the  grave  and  solemn  responsibilities  of  the 
duty  which  the  State  now  calls  upon  you  to  perform.  I  share  with 
you  in  the  sentiment  that  the  duty  is  as  painful  and  unwelcome  as 
it  is  solemn  and  important.  But  your  State  lias  the  right  to  demand 
your  services  in  whatever  capacity  the  public  interest  requires. 
And,  whether  you  are  called  upon  to  peril  your  life  upon  the  field  of 
battle  in  her  defense,  or,  in  her  civil  service,  you  are  called  upon  to 
sit  in  judgment  upon  a  question  involving  the  life  of  a  fellow- 
being,  the  State  expects  and  requires  you  to  nerve  your  heart  a  ad 
mind  to  the  high  and  stern  performance  of  your  whole  duty. 
Already  you  have  listened  to  appeals  and  witnessed  scenes  in  the 
course  of  this  trial  well  calculated  to  swell  the  fountains  of  your 
sympathy  for  the  prisoner  and  his  sorrowing  parents.  They  have 
been  in  your  presence  during  the  long  and  weary  hours  and  days 
of  this  trial;  and  doubtless  in  the  addresses  which  will  be  made  to 
you  by  the  very  able,  zealous,  and  eloquent  counsel  for  the  defense, 
nothing  will  be  left  unsaid  which  may  tend  to  excite  your  emotions 
of  pity  and  sympathy  for  the  prisoner.  I  know  you  are  but  men, 
and  that  such  emotions,  in  listening  to  such  appeals,  and  witness- 
ing scenes  of  distress,  spring  up  in  the  noblest  hearts  and  often 
mislead  the  most  honest  minds.  The  stern  performance  of  a  pain- 
ful duty  under  such  circumstances  is  often  most  difficult.  The 
example  of  the  Roman  father,  whose  high  public  duty  demanded 
of  him  the  sentence  of  death  upon  his  own  son,  has  been  held  up 
to  the  admiration  of  successive  generations  as  a  heroic  triumph  of 
public  duty  over  parental  emotions.  Our  laws  do  not  impose  such 
anguish  upon  those  now  called  to  the  performance  of  such  public 
duty.  They  do  not  require  or  allow  a  man  to  be  judge  in  his  own 
case,  or  in  that  of  a  relative,  even  in  civil  suits.  Just  and  impar- 
tial minds  are  to  weigh  the  evidence  and  pronounce  upon  |  he  law. 
They  are  to  discharge  this  duty  under  the  most  solemn  and  bind- 
ing sanction  which  can  influence  the  conscience  of  men,  \  on 
have  been  selected  and  assigned  to  duty  in  this  case.  To  enable 
you  to  perforin  it  aright,  the  Constitution  has  invested  you  witli 
the  highest  possible  powers.  It  declare-  that  in  all  criminal  eases 
the  jury  shall  be  judges  of  law  as  well  as  fact.  If  you  convict,  the 
Court  has  a  discretion,  upon  good  cause  shown,  to  grant  a  new 


52  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLA'cK 

trial  before  another  jury.  Bui  if  you  acquit  there  Is  no  earthly 
tribunal  which  can  try  the  party  again  for  the  same  offense. 

In  view  of  such  powers  and  such  consequences  you  arc  called,  to 
try  this  case.  The  law  has  afforded  theprisoner every  possiblesafe- 
guard  against  injustice.  The  eloquent  counsel,  who  made  to  you 
what  be  called  the  opening  Statement  for  the  defense,  complained 
that  the  state  had  caused  the  trial  to  be  removed  from  Cumber- 
land where  this  tragedy  took  place,  and  where  the  parties  were 
best  know.  The  record  shows  that  this  was  done  after  eight 
jurors  had  been  sworn,  and  upon  the  oath  of  the  State's  attorney 
that  the  State,  in  his  judgment,  could  not  have  a  fair  and  impar- 
tial trial  of  this  case  in  that  county.  Under  these  circumstances 
it  was  removed,  and  it  may  be  fairly  inferred  that  the  necessity  of 
the  removal  for  the  purposes  of  justice  was  forced  upon  the  mind 
of  the  State's  officer  while  the  selection  of  the  jury  was  going  on. 
But  the  State  has  provided  the  prisoner  with  every  facility  for  a 
fair  and  impartial  trial  here.  The  attendance  of  every  witness  he 
desired  has  been  enforced.  He  lias  freely  exercised'  his  right  of 
peremptory  challenge,  and  challenge  for  cause,  until  a  jury  has 
been  selected,  to  which  he  can  take  no  exception.  And  from  the 
high  character  for  intelligence  and  integrity  awarded  to  you  from 
every  quarter  the  best  guaranty  is  afforded  for  the  faithful  admin- 
istration of  the  law. 

A  jury  of  twelve  honest,  upright,  impartial  men,  experience  in 
the  affairs  of  common  life,  is  universally  admitted  to  be  the  best 
constituted  tribunal  for  the  trial  of  controverted  facts,  and  for 
the  ascertainment  of  the  motive  of  acts,  which  the  accumulated 
wisdom  and  experience  of  past  ages  has  been  able  to  devise. 

But  I  again  invoke  you  to  bring  to  the  consideration  of  this  case 
a  calm  judgment  and  a  stern  resolve.  I  invoke  you  to  remove  from 
your  minds  any  impression  which  may  have  been  made  upon  them 
by  the  impassioned  eloquence  of  the  opening  counsel  for  the  de- 
fense upon  a  detailed  statement  of  a  case  of  seduction,  which  has 
turned  out  to  have  existed  only  in  his  excited  imagination,  and  of 
which  there  is  not  before  you  one  particle  of  legel  evidence.  And 
this  brings  me  to  remind  you  upon  what  you  are  to  found  your 
verdict.  You  are  not  to  try  this  case  by  excited  emotions  of  sym- 
pathy for  the  present  distress  which  your  eyes  may  see.  The  an- 
guish of  a  deep  grief  crushes  the  broken  hearts  of  mother  and 
wife  of  the  deceased  William  W.  McKaig  in  the  seclusion  of  their 
distant  homes.  The  shock  of  his  instant  death  which  closed  the 
places  of  business  in  the  town  of  his  home,  and  sent  unusual  mul- 
titudes of  sorrowing  citizens  to  his  funeral,  has  not  ceased  to 
vibrate  in  the  memory  of  those  who  best  knew  him,  and  whose 
confidence  and  respect  he  had  so  generally  inspired.  But  these  are 
not  the  considerations  by  which  you  are  to  be  influenced  in  your 
verdict. 

Whatever  of  pity  and  sorrow  you  may  feel  as  fellowmen  for 
those,  whether  present  or  absent,  whose  hearts  bleed  under  the 
consequences  of  this  terrible  tragedy,  must  cease  to  disturb  the 
calm  operations  of  your  sober  judgment,  as  public  officers  of  the 
law,  charged  with  the  responsibilities  of  a  high  public  duty. 

When  this  indictment  was   read  to  you,  charging  the  prisoner 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    M'KAIG,    JR.  53 

with  the  highest  crime  known  to  the  law — murder  with  malice 
aforethought — you  were  informed  that  it  was  perpetrated  against 
the  peace,  government,  and  dignity  of  the  .State  of  Maryland. 
These  are  to  be  vindicated.  The  sanctity  and  security  of  human 
life  is  to  be  vindicated'.  The  very  foundation  a  of  law,  government, 
and  civil  society  are  involved  in  the  questions  submitted  to  your 
consideration.  And  by  What  rule  are  these  questions  to  be  de- 
cided? <  >f  what  law  has  the  constitution  made  you  judges?  I  beg 
to  remind  you  of  the  terms  of  that  oath,  for  the  sanctity  and  due 
observance  of  which  you  have  severally  made  your  solemn  appeal 
to  God,  "you  shall  well  and  truly  try,  and  a  true  deliverance  make 
bet  ween  the  State  of  Maryland  and  the  prisoner  at  the  bar  whom 
you  shall  have  in  charge,  and  a  true  verdict  give  according  to  the 
evidence,  so  help  you  God."  Your  verdict  is  to  be  founded  upon 
the  evidence  of  facts  legally  before  you,  and  upon  the  existing 
established  law  for  the  punishment  of  homicide.  The  definitions 
of  murder  in  the  first  and  second  degrees,  and  of  manslaughter, 
and  the  well-defined  distinctions  between  those  crimes  have  been 
already  made  known  to  you.  I  may  advert  to  them  again  in  the 
application  of  the  evidence. 

I  now  beg  you  to  contemplate  the  facts  which  are  in  evidence 
before  you.  It  has  been  shown  that  the  prisoner  and  the  deceased, 
Colonel  MeKaig,  were  both  natives  of  Cumberland;  that  both  left 
i heir  homes,  and  were  soldiers  in  the  Confederate  army  in  the  late 
war  bel  ween  the.  States  ;  they  had  both  periled  their  lives  for  the 
"lost  cause;"  they  were  both  familiar  with  the  use  of  the  pistol 
and  with  scenes  of  imminent  personal  danger.  It  is  not  pretended 
that  it  was  a  case  of  a  brave,  fearless,  and  dangerous  man  on  the 
one  side,  and  cf  a  kind,  nervous,  frightened  man,  unused  to  the 
sight  and  practice  of  tire-anus,  upon  the  other.    It  is  important  to 

i  bis  fact  in  mind,  especially  in  considering  the  theory  of  self- 
defense  which  is  attempted  to  be  established. 

■  facts  attending  the  tragedy  of  the  fatal  morning  of  the  17th 
of  October  last,  which  are  proved  beyond  possible  question,  are 
that  early  on  that  morning  the  prisoner  was  seen  in  the  vicinity  of 
the  place  of  business  of  the  deceased,  and  looking  into  his  office. 
For  what  purpose  was  he  there ?  What  was  his  motive  ?  This,  gen- 
tlemen, you  art-  to  infer  from  his  acts  and  conduct.  God  only  knows 
with  absolute  certainty  the  secret  workings  of  the  human  heart-, 
[f  such  knowledge  were  required  in  human  affairs,  it  is  manifest 
that  the  administration  of  human  government  would  be  utterly 
impossible.  Omniscience  is  the  indispensable  attributeof  Go  i  who 
governs  the  universe;  but  lie  has  made  social  life — the.  dwelling 
together  of  men  in  communities— the  law  of  man's  existence. 
Hence  results  the  absolute  necessity  of  civil  government  as  a  di- 
vine institution.  For  the  purpose  of  its  rightful  exercise  God  has 
endowed  man  with  an  immortal  sonl,  and  with  the  high  faculties 
Of  reason  and  conscience. 

Our  laws,  then,  arc  made  by  men  for  the  government  of  m&n^  and' 
to  be  administered  by  men  ;  and  whenever  in  human  affairs  the 
question  arises  with   what  motive  an  act  was  done,  you  have  to 

s  of  it  by  your  knowledge  of  your  own  hearts,  passions,  and 
Dions,  and  by  the  light  which  experience  and  observation 


51  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

afford.     In  this  way  you  judge  of  the  condition  of  mind,  the  ptrr- 

i  he  motive  with  which  an  act  was  done  ;  and  forthis  pui 
y<  u  are  to  consider  all  the  surrounding  circumstances  of  the  par- 
ticular transaction.     And  you  remember  that  it  was  to  sbowto 

'  he  condition  of  the  prisoner's  mind  at  the  moment  of  firing 
the  fatal  shots  that  the  Court  admitted  in  evidence  conversations 
held  with  him,  on  Saturday  evening  previous,  by  Henshaw,  and  on 
Sunday'by  Lowndes  and  the  prisoner's  mother.  5Tou  are  better 
informed  as  to  what  those  communications  made  to  the  prisoner 
were  than  I  am.  You  heard  the  statement  of  the  wil  n<  •  -■.  Not 
having  been  present  on  that  day,  I  know  the  testimony  then  given 
only  from  the  newspaper  accounts.  Whether  those  reports  were 
corrector  not  you  will  judge.  From  them  T  learn  that  the  evi- 
dence of  Mr.  Henshaw  was  to  the  effect  that  he  had.  on  Saturday 
evening,  inquired  of  young  Black  if  the  grand  jury  had  indicted 
his  father,  and  he  said  they  had  not.  The  wil  ness  told  him  that 
he  had  two  reasons  tor  believing  they  would  ifidict  his  father;  one, 
because  Beale  McKaig  had  told  him  they  would;  the  other,  be- 
cause he  had  heard  that  Colouel  McKaig,  at  the  fair  grounds,  had 

unced  his  sister  as  a  common  strumpet;  that  young  Black  re- 
plied lie  had  not  been  able  to  learn  the  truth  of  that  report  of  the 
i  mark  of  Colonel  McKaig.  Witness  further  told  him  that  he  had 
heard  that,  at  the  fair  grounds,  Colonel  McKaig  had  told  Black's 
father  that  whoever  said  he  (McKaig)  was  the  seducer  of  his  sis- 
ter was  a  liar;  upon  which  Black  said,  "  ily  God,  is  it  possible  !" 
changed  color,  and  seemed  much  excited. 

(Mi  cross-examination  this  witness  stated  that  he  had  read  in 
the  Cumberland  paper  that  the  prisoner's  father  had  shot  0<  ' 
McKaig.  That  publication  had  been  madeseveral  months  be 
and  it  would  seem  incredible  that  the  prisoner  could  have  rema 
ignorant  of  the  shooting,  and  of  the  alledged  cause  of  ii.  Evi- 
dently the  conversation  of  Henshaw  was  predicated  upon  his  b  - 
lit-f  that  the  prisoner  Was  fully  aware  of  the  shooting,  otherwise 
he  would  not  have  asked  the  prisoner  whether  the  grand  jury  had 
indicted  his  father;  and  the  reply  of  the  prisoner  that  they  had  wOt 
is  inconsistent  with  the  theory  attempted  to  he  set  up  by  the  de- 
fense, that  the  prisoner  was  then  for  the  first  time  informed  of 
any  cause  for  such  indictment.  Then,  if  for  several  weeks  or 
months  he  had  known  of  the  shooting  of  McKaig  by  his  father, 
and  of  the  alleged  cause  of  it,  he  was  on  that  Saturday  evening 
informed  that  Colonel  McKaig  had,  in  the  must  emphatic  terms, 
denied  that  he  was  the  seducer  of  the  prisoner's  sister.  With  this 
information  he  went  home,  reaching  there,  as  his  mother  states, 
at  about  11  o'clock  that  night.  It  does  not  appear  from  her  testi- 
mony that  he  manifested  any  unusual  excitement  that  night.  .No 
inquiry  by  the  defense  appears  to  have  been  made  of  her  upon  that 
subject.  The  inquiry  by  the  defense  was,  "What  happened  the 
next  day?"  The  reply  was,  twlle  went  up  town  as  usual  after 
breakfast ;  he  always  goes  upon  Sunday,  when  at  home,  to  see  his 
aunt;  that  she  knew  what  had  been  told  him  ;  she  knew  lie  had 

;  fold  ail.1'  Then  Mr.  Lowndes  testified  that  between  9 and 
10  o'clock  on  Sunday  morning  the  prisoner  went  to  his  house,  and 
he  informed  him  of  the  letter  from  Colonel  McKaig  to  his  sister. 


FOR   KILLING   COLONEL    W.    W.    M'kaIG,    JR.  55 

On  cross-examination  the  -witness  stated  that  they  were  talking  in 
reference  to  preparing  his  father's  defense.  The  witness  was 
counsel  for  the  father. 

It  lias  been  shown  by  the  record  that  the  father  bad  been  pre- 
sented to  the  grand  jury,  on  Friday,  the  14th  of  October,  1871,  for 
shooting  "W.  W.  McKaig,  with  intent  to  kill  him;  and  that  on 
Saturday  he  had  entered  into  recognizance  for  his  appearance  to 
answer  that  charge. 

Mr.  Lowndes  told  the  prisoner  that  his  sister  would  have  come 
on;  and  that  he,  the  witness,  was  informed  Colonel  McKaig  was 
the  seducer  of  his  sister;  and  the  prisoner  seemed  distressed  over 
the  ruin  of  his  sister.*  From  Mr.  Lowndes  the  prisoner  went  to 
Mr.  Roman's;  Mr.  L.  soon  followed,  and  saw  the  prisoner  read 
tlic  letter  which  has  been  shown  and  read  to  thejury.  In  refer- 
ence to  that  letter,  you  will  observe  that  it  bears  date  June  20, 
1SGG,  about  four  years  before  the  birth  of  the  child,  which  has 
been  spoken  of.  The  letter  itself  is  of  singular  import,  and  it 
comes  before  you  in  a  mysterious  way.  It  is  alleged  to  have  been 
written  bv  Colonel  McKaig  to  Miss  Black;  but  there  is  no  evi- 
dence-whatever  that  either  of  them  ever  saw  the  letter.  Where 
it  came  from,  who  tore  it,  who  put  the  pieces  together,  in  whose 
keeping  it  has  been  for  these  four  years  and  more,  why  it  has  been 
kept,  and  how  it  finds  its  way  here  are  left  unexplained.  Mr. 
IJesley  testified  that  he  believed  it  to  be  in  the  handwriting  of 
Colonel  McKaig.  But  evidence  of  handwriting,  especially 
after  four  years  have  elapsed,  can  not  be  free  from  great 
uncertainty.  The  letter  itself  shows,  upon  its  face,  that  it  has 
been  tampered  with  since  it  was  written.  It  was  evidently  writ- 
ten in  pencil,  and  has  since  been  inked  over,  for  the  pencil  marks 
are  yet  visible  all  through  it.  It  is  now  written  in  a  plain,  round 
hand,  so  legible  that  no  one  can  have  any  difficulty  in  reading  it. 
And  yet  at  the  bottom,  there  are  added  tin  se  words  :  tl  If  you  read 
this,  "you  will  do  more  than  I  can."  This,  too,  is  traced  over 
with  ink;  but  the  pencil  marks  appear.  It  is  stated  also  that 
these  part  ies  were  of  high  respectability  in  Cumberland,  and  that 
Colonel  McKaig  was  a  well-educated  gentlemen.  This  letter  bears 
upon  its  face  evidence  that  it  had  no  such  origin  as  is  now  alleged. 
[t  bears  the  impress  of  ignoranceand  vulgarity.  It  would  seem 
incredible  that  it  could  have  been  written  by  Colonel  McKaig  to 
Miss  Black. 

But  by  whomever  and  to  whomever  written  it  affords  not  the 
slightest  indication  of  a  case  of  seduction.  It  manifests  a  shock- 
Log  case  of  familiar,  criminal  intercourse.  It  purports  to  be  a 
reply  to  a  letter  received,  which  upbraided  the  it  cciw  r  with  not 
wanting  to  see  her,  and  that  he  was  losing  all  love  for  her. 

But  it  will  be  for  you,  gentlemen  of  the  jury1,  to  determine  from 
all  the  circumstances  whether  the  pi  isoner  did  believe  it  to  have 
been  written  to  his  siBter  as  represented  to  him,  and  what  effect 
it  had,  or  OUght  to  have  had  upon  his  mind  alter  the  interval  of 
nearly  twenty-four  hours  for  eooling  r<  fieel  ion. 

It  will  also  he  tor  you  to  determine  what  effect  the  conversation 
betw<  en  the  mother  and  Mr.  Lowndes,  on  u,;it  fejundaj  evening  in 
the  hi  aring  of  the  prisoner,  had  upon  his  mind;  and  how  far  it  en- 


56  TRIAL    OP   HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

tiered  into  the  motive  for  his  conduct  and  acts  on  the  ratal  Mon- 
day morning.  STou  will  bear  in  mind  that  Mr.  Lowndes  testifies 
that  he  went  to  Mrs.  Black's  that  afternoon,  inquired  of  her 
where  her  daughter  was.  and  told  her  that  she  would  have  to 
come  mi  to  the  trial  of  her  father:  that  after  refusing,  and  being 
told  that  her  husband  would  prdbably  be  senl  to  the  penitentiary 
the  mother  finally  stated  where  the  daughter  was;  that  she  had 
given  birth  to  a  child,  which  was  four  months  old,  but  that  the 
father  would  have  to  take  the  chances  of  his  trial  without  her 
testimony,  for  her  daughter  could  not  be  brought  to  the  witness 
stand  in  his  case.  But  it  may  be  asked,  why  not?  It  could  not 
add  to  the  daughter's  disgrace  to  go  upon  the  witness  stand  and 
testify  that  all  that  high-wrought,  impassioned  tale  of  seduction 
to  which  you  listened  in  brother  Siyester's  opening,  was  but  the 
literal  truth,  if  she  could  truthfully  sb: testify.  It  is  true  McKaig 
was  then  living  and  was  a  witness  for  the  prosecution.  But  if  in 
1865,  when  he  met  her,  she  was  a  pure  ami  virtuous  woman,  and 
so  universally  held  esteemed  in  the  town  and  neighborhood  of  her 
residence,  what  have  conscious  truth  and  virtue  to  fear,  even  in  a 
conflict  of  testimony  before  a  jury  in  such  a  case?.  But  McKaig 
is  dow  dead.  No  such  conflict  from  him  is  possible.  The  brol  her 
is  on  trial  for  his  life  for  murder,  and  yet  nptwithstahdiug  what 
you  were,  told  in  that  extraordinary  and  astounding  address,  she 
is  not  put  upon  the  stand;  no  offer  to  do  so  has  been  made.  But 
this  terrible,  charge  against  the  deceased  McKaig  isleij't  forest 
upon  this  miserable,  stale  letter,  and  loose,  hearsay  declarations,. 
The  jury  will  recollect  that  when  the  letter  was  offered  in  evi- 
dence, the  counsel  for  the  State  inquired  the  purpose,; and  were 
told  that  tin'  defense  offered  to  prove,  by  competent  evide 
that  the  prisoner's  sister  was  seduced  by  the  deceased,  and  had 
borne  a  child  a.s  the  result;  that  these  facts  were  made  known  to 
the  prisoner  prior  to  the  homicide,  and  has  caused  intense  mental 
agitation, for  the  purpose,  first,  to  show  thecondttion  of  his  mind 
at  the  time  of  killing  the  deceased,  and  second,  to  enable  the  jury 
to  determine  the  grade  of  homicide.  To  this  the  State  replied 
that  the  letter  had  no  tendency  to  prove  seduction,  which  charge 
the  State,  was  ready  to  meet,  if  legal  evidence  to  establish  it  was 
offered  and  admitted,  and  the  S:ate  was  permitted  to  rebut  it. 
The  Court  ruled  that  it  was  not  competent  in  this  case;  to  prove 
the  fact  of  seduction,  but  that  the  communications  made  to  the 
prisoner  might  be  given  in  evidence  to  show  the  state  of  his  mind, 
and  to  determine-  the  grade  of  the  homicide.  Wed,  you  have  all 
that  evidence  before  yon:  the  letter,  the  charge  against  McKaig, 
resting  on  hearsay;  his  denial;  his  rumored  stigma  upon  the  sis- 
ter; the  birth  of  her  child;  the  pending  prosecution  of  the  elder 
Black;  the  danger  of  the  penitentiary,  if  the  sister  does  not  come 
on  to  be  a  witness,  and  the  mother's  declaration  that,  whatever 
might  be  the  consequences,  her  daughter  could  not  go  upon  the 
witness  stand.  The  mother  thinks  the  prisoner  did  not  sleep 
that  night,  but  passed  the  night  in  deep  distress  and  nervous 
agitation.  The  two  subjects  of  discussion  and  consultation  dur- 
ing the  day  and  evening  doubtless  occupied  his  thoughts  during 
the  lonely  watches  of  that  night;  these  were  his  sister's  disgrace 


TOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    MKAW,   JR. 

and  tin'  father's  dapper  of  the  penitentiary.  He  had  been  told  i  hat 
McKaig  was  the  atithor  or  both.  He  lia<l  theeni  ireday  and  night 
for  reflection   and    "cooling  time."     Toward  morning  he  fell 

asleep.  AVIien  lie  awoke,  near  7  o'clock,  the,  mother  conversed 
with  him,  but  does  not  describe  him  as  in  a  transport  of  passion 
or  phrenzied  excitement.  On  the  contrary,  he  was qprnparatively 
calm— did  not  care  about  being  too  late  for  the  cars— had  hills  to 
l>ay,  and  could  go  on  the  12  o'clock  train,  and  thus  he  started  to- 
ward Cumberland.  He  was  next  seen  at  Shantytown,  in  a  store, 
buying  cigars,  and  left  the  store  smoking, going  in  the  direction 
of  the  foundry,  which  was  McKaig's  place  of  business.  Mr.  Ar- 
rick  saw  him  walking  slowly  by  the  foundry,  looking  into  the 
office,  with  his  hands  in  the  pockets  of  his  overcoat.  Cragin  saw 
him  at  the  corner  of  Baltimore  and  Mechanic  streets,  walking 
slowly  and  looking  over  the  bridge,  which  McKaig  must  cross  on 
his  way  to  his  foundry.  Mr.  Hughey,  as  he  was  passings  saw  him 
in  the  recess  of  the  door  of  ShrLver's  drug  store,  and  when  the 
prisoner  stepped  out  upon  the  pavement,  went  back  to  him  and 
held  a  short  conversation  wiib  him;  noticed  that  he  kept  his 
right  hand  in  bis  overcoat  ppeket,  which  seemed  tobeoccupied  by 
something  more  than  his  hand—he  gave  Mr.  Hughey  his  left  hand, 
and  after  the  few  words  of  conversation,  left  Mr  Hughey  rather 
abruptly.  Dr.  Smith  had  also  seen  the  prisoner  standing  in  the 
door  of  Hambird's  store,  which  commanded  a  view  of  the  bridge. 

Thus  the  prisoner  is  shown  to  have  passed  a  full  half  hour  in 
that  vicinity.  For  what  purpose  was  he  there  ?  lie  is  not  shown  to 
have  transacted  any  business,  or  to  have  paid  any  bills,  At  length 
Mr.  McKaig  is  observed  to  cross  the  bridge  and  following  his  ac- 
customed way,  he  goes  over  to  the  south  side  of  Baltimore  street, 
proceeding  to  his  place  of  business.  At  this  momeut  be  is  obseved 
by  Dr.  Healy,  who,  happening  to  look  up  the  street,  saw  the  pris- 
oner approaching  McKaig  on  the  same  side  of  the  street.  Dr. 
Healy  being  upon  the  opposite  side  of  the  street,  kept  his 
steadily  lixe  1  upon  the  two  young  men.  When  within  a  few  steps 
of  each  other,  the  prisoner  suddenly  made  a  few  quick  steps  and 
lired  upon  McKaig,  The  position  of  the  wound  and  course  of  the 
fatal  ball,  as  described  by  Dr.  Duvall,  show  that  the  parties  \\-i-\-<\ 
side  hj  side  when  the  first  shot  was  lired.  Dr.  Healy,  Dr.  Smith, 
and  several  others  who  saw  the  parties  instantly  after  the  first 
shot,  testify  that  McKaig  threw  up  both  hands,  and  had  nothing 
ih  either;  had  evidently  received  a  mortal  wound;  backed  off  the 
pavement  into  the  street,  facing  his  assailant,  was  again  sii 
as  he  was  backing  diagonally  across  the  si  feel ;  t  hat  t  he  prj 
then  left  the  pavement,  crossed  i  he  s(  reet  to  near  where  McKaig 
was  clinging  around  a  sign  post,  tired  a  second  ball  into  ins  body, 
and,  as  thedyiugman  was  exerting  the  last  staggering  effort  of 
his  failing  strength  to  escape  from  his  pursuer,  and  was  falling  to 
the  ground,  a  third  shot  into  the  almost  lifeless  body,  was  the 
finalacfcin  this  bloody  tragedy  1  Thus  was  William  \v.  McKaig, 
without  a  word,  or  a  moments  warning,  shot  down,  dead,  in  the 
street  of  Cumberland,  by  the  prisoner  at  the  bar. 

From  this  act,  as  has  been  read  to  you,  and  is  not  denied,  the 
law  implies  malice  aforethought,  constituting  the  crime  of  willful, 


58  TRIAL   OF    HARRY   CRAWFORD   BLACK! 

deliberate,  a,nd  premeditated  murder.  Because  every' man  shall 
be  held  to  intend  the  natural  and  inevitable  consequences  of 
bis  act,  the  burden  of  piroof  is  upon  bim  to  satisfy  the  fury  of 
the  contrary.  This  is  admitted;  and  theableand  eloquent  counsel 
for  the  prisoner  have  suggested  two  theories  of  defense,  by  both 
or  byoneor  the  other  of  which^.they  propose  to  rebut  the] 
presumption  of  deliberate  malice.  The  one,  is  theirtheoryof  pr6V- 
ecation,  that  is,  a  sudden  injnty  or  insult  of  such  i  that 

human  nature  is  not  able  to  bear  it,  bill  is  roused  to  such  phrenzy 
of  anger,  to  such  a  transport  of  passidn,  that  in  the  beat  of  Mood 
and  without  malice,  he  takestne  Lifeof  his  fellow.  But  the  law 
is,  that  if,  between- the  injury  or   insult  and  I  ,'   killing, 

there  has  been,  sufficient  cooling  time  for  reflection  and  for  reason 
to  resume  its  sway,  the  act  will  be  murder.  I  propose  to  read  to 
you  some  instances  to  illustrate  what  has  been  held  I 
cooling- time — Mr.  Jones  read  from  Wharton's  American  Crimi- 
nal Law,  several  cases  upon  the  point — and  then  proceeded.  5Tou 
will  thus  perceive  that  the  case  before  you  comes  far  Short  of  fall- 
ing within  the  principles  of  the  cases  L  have  read.  Where  is  the 
evidence  of  such  heat  of  blood,  or  ungovernable  passion,  suddenly 
aroused,  without  previous  malice,  impelling  to  this  fatal 
Look  through  the  entire  evidence  attending  each  su  61  ssive  step 
of  the  prisoner  from  the  moment  of  his  awaking  in  the  morning, 
till  the  final  bloody  act  and,  with  your  hand  on  your  hearts  and 
your  conscience  alive  t6  the  oath  you  have  taken,  say  if  you  per- 
ceive anything  but  a  cairn  demeanor,  a  patient  looking  and  wait- 
ing for  his  victim,  and  the  deliberate  execution  of  a  well-planned 
purpose. 

The  second  theory  of  the  prisoner's  counsel  is,  that  he  took  the 
life  of  McKaig  in  self-defense.    Kow,  gentlemen,  you  dannot  fail 
to  see  how  utterly  inconsistent,  and  mutually  destructive  i 
two  defenses  are.     Provocation,  exciting  a  person  to  ungo 
lurry,  drives  him  to  seek  the  author  of   it,  and,  to  attack  him; 
while  self-defense  is  just  the  reverse.    The  person  who  sets   up 
lefense,  must  decline  a  combat,  if  he  can.    The  old  common 
law  required  him  to  retreat  to  a  wall,  or  as  far  as  he  safely  could 
consistently  with  the  preservation  of  his  own  life.    And  the 
utmost  extent  to  which,  even  now,  the  law  allows,  or  has 
allowed,  a  person  who  has  committed  homicide  to  excuse  tie 
on  the  ground  of  self-defense,  is  to  show  conclusively  to  the  jury 
that  he  committed  the  act  in  the  real,  bona  fide  belief  that  it  was 
absolutely  necessary  to  the  preservation  of  lii's  own  life.   The  same 
legal  presumption  of  malice  which  constitutes  murder,  conl  iuues 
to  exist  until  the  prisoner  rebut  it  by  proof.  Clear  and  satisfactory 
to  the  minds  of  the  jury,  that  he  acted  solely  under  a  sudden  impulse 
of  self-preservation,  in  the  presenceof  a  danger,  which  heactually 
believed,  at  the  moment,  to  be  imminent  and  inevitable,  except  by 
killing  the  assailant,    i  on  will  bear  in  mind  that  the  burden  of 
proof,  as  in  the  case  of  provocation,  is  upon  the  prisoner.  Now,  what 
particle  of  evidence' has  been  adduced  to  show  that  the  prisoner 
had  any  reason  whatever  to  apprehend  an  attack  upon  him  by  Mc- 
Kaig?   As  to  the  story  of  Long  it  is  shown  by  two  witnesses  who 
have  examined  the  location  in  Which   he  states  he  stood  and  S&w 


FOR    KILLrNO    COLONEL    W.    W.    m'kAIO,    JR.  59 

McKaig  holding  a  pistol  behind  liim,  at  the  corner  of  the  Revere 
House,  watching  Black  as  he approached  him,  that  it  is  impossible 
the  statement  can  l^e  true,  because  of  obstacles  in  the  line  <>r  vis- 
ion, as  describe']  by  Long.  But  suppose  t  he  statement  to  be  true. 
it  proves  that  McKaisr,  pistol  in  hand,  concealed  by  the  corner  of 
the houaej  watched  Black  till  he  approached' within  ten  feet  of 
him;  and  when  Black  stopped,  turned,  and  went  up  the  street 
again;  that  McKaig  leisurely  followed  him  v  as  far  as  Long  saw 
them.  But  according  to  this  McKaig-,  having  the  fullest  opporttir 
nity  to  shoot  Black,  if  he  desired  to  do<so,  dad  cot  molest,  bim. 
.And  when  McKaigwas  charged  by  Black  with  jostling' him  in  the 
billiard  saloon,  the  witness  says,  McKaig  said  not  a  word.  Out 
turned  and  went  out.  What  reason,  then,  had  McKaig  to  make  an 
attack  on  Black,  or  had  Black  to  apprehend  such  a!  tack  '.J  Not  t  he 
slightpst-SQ  far  as  is  shown  by  the  testimony.  Is  there  any  cred* 
itable  evidence  that  previous  to.  or  at  the  moment  of,  the  prison- 
er's firing  the  first  shot,  he  had  any  reason  whatever  to  apprehend 
danger  to  himself  from  McKaig?  In  the  opening  statement  to 
you  of  what  the  defense  expected  to  prove,  it  was  said  that  .Mc- 
Kaig, when  near  Black,  changed  his  cane  froai  his  right  to  his 
left  hand,  and  presented  his  pistol,  hut  Black,  having H  self-cocker^ 
was  too  quick  and  tired  first.  Now,  I  submit  to  you,  gentlemen; 
whether  that  statement  has  been  sustained  by  a,  particle  of  evi- 
dence. Meilore  tcsti, ied  that  he.was  in  hiSiShop,  standing; with 
his  back  to  the  window,  when  he  heard  the  first  -hot;  lie  turned 
round,  looked  through  the  window  pane  and  saw  McKaig  crossing 
the  street  on  a  trot,  with  a  revolver  in  his  hand.  Then,  confess- 
edly, he  did  not  see  the  parties  meet  on  the  street,  and  could  not 
testify  that  McKaig  had  a  pistol  in  his  hand  before  the  first  shot. 
Dr.  Duvall  testified  that  the  shot  in  the,  side,  which,  from  the  tes- 
timony,  you  cannot  doubt  was  the  first  shot,  was  mortal;  that  it  - 
effect  was  almost  instantly  to  paralyze  the  heart  and  brain.  And 
Dr.  ileaiv,  who  was  intently  watching  both,  sw  ars  t  hat  Mc  I . 
at  the  first  lire,  instantly  threw  up  both  hands,  and  that  it  was 
impossible,  according  to  his  belief,  that  he  could  have  had  a-  pis- 
tol in  his  hand,  or  that  it  could  have  dropped  out  of  Ins  iiand 
without  his  seeing  it.  Mr.  Wolf  was  standing  by  Dr.  Elealy,  ami 
states  thai  he  saw  a  pistol  fall  EromMcKaig's  hand,  after  the  first 
shot.  But  Dr.  Healy  states  that  Wolf  told  him,  at  Cumberland, 
that  he  saw  no  pistol  in  McKaig's  hand;  that  In1,  \)r.  Elealy,  in 
all  the.  talk  about  the  events  of  the  morning,  in  Cumberland, 

never  heard  that  anyone  had  saiil  a  pistol  had  been  ^'rn  in  Mc- 
Kaig's  hand  at  the  time  of  the  shooting,  until  since, he  came  to 
Frederick.  John  Hipp  did  not  see  them  till  after  the  first  shot. 
He  slates  thai,  he  turned  around  and  sa\>  .,  .s,  g  running  and 
Black  after  him,  and  says  he  saw  a  revolver  in  the  hand  of  each, 
nut  Ins  whole  description  of  the  affair  is  so  coat  radiefcory  in  itself, 
and  of  all  the  others  who  wil  nessed  it,  as  to  destroy  its  credibility. 

L  submit  wii et. her  the  same  is  not,  also  the  effect  of  the  bI 
iiH'uis  of  the  two  colored  witnesses,  Davis  and  Grarney,     riiey 
both  testify  that  at  the  moment  of  the  first  sh  »t,  each  was  stand- 
ing at  Byan'scorner,  yet  neither  saw  the  other,  a. id  neither  was 
se.  a  by  I  !<•  I  wo  or  three  resj  BC table  witnesses  who  came  out  of 


GO  TRIAL    OF  HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

RyaDS's  store  instantly  on  hearing  the  first  shot.  Garney  says  he 
heardapisto]  shot,  looked  up  and  saw  Black  and  MeKaig,  and 
both  bad  a  pistol.  Then  he  does  not  profess  to  have  seen  a  pis- 
tol in  Mi'K  tig's  hand  before  the  first  shot.  Davis  says  after  Me- 
Kaig passed  him.  he  saw  a  pistol  shining  out  of  a  holster;  did  nol 
see  the  first  fire,  and  does  not  state  that  he  saw  a  pistol  in  McKaig's 
hand  at  all.  The  lad,  Clark,  states  that  he  was  in  Medore's  shop. 
Now,  this  Medore  is  the  witness  who  testified  that  Clark  was 
with  him  in  his  shop;  after  the  first  shot  both  t  nrned  and  looked 
out  of  the  window;  and  yet  how  totally  different  h  the  statement 
of  the  two;  Medore  says  be  saw  a  pistol  in  McKaig's  hand;  Clark 
says  he  did  not,  but  saw  a  pistol  fall,  but  does  led  know  from 
whom.  Xow,  I  appeal  to  yon  again,  has  any  witness  testified 
that,  before  the  first  mortal  wound  was  inflicted,  he  saw  a.  pistol 
iu  McKaig's  hand,  much  less  presented  at  Black  ?  A  pistol  was 
seen  on  the  ground,  aud  two  most  respectable  witnesses  say  they 
saw  it  fail  from  McKaig's  person,  as  his  dead  body  was  being  lifted 
up  for  removal  into  the  office. 

ft  is  true  MeKaig  had  two  pistols  on  his  person,  but  it  is  submitted 
whether  the  result  of  the  whole  testimony  does  not  force  convic- 
tion upon  your  minds  that  MeKaig  was  taken  utterly  by  surprise 
when  he  r  jceived  the  first  mortal  bullet  into  bis  body,  and  tlirew 
up  his  empty  hands,  retreating  from  his  assailant  in  dying  agony; 
and  pursuvd  by  tiie  prisoner  with  repeated  shots  and  murderous 
intent  until  his  lifeless  form  lay  prostrate  in  the  street  !  Did  the 
circumstances  given  in  evidence  excite  a  sudden  phrenzy  and 
transport  of  passion?  Ordid  they  produce  in  his  mind  an  intense 
hate,  a  fixed  purpose  of  revenge,  a  deliberate  determination  to 
his  victim  on  that  morning,  and  take  his  life?  Was  it  self* 
use  or  willful,  deliberate,  and  premeditated  murder?  in  con- 
tradiction of  both  these  afterthought  theoriesl  call  your  attention 
to  the  evidence  of  one  who  best  of  all  on  earth  hriew  the  motives 
and  purposes  of  the  prisoner's  heart,  and  his  reason  for  killing 
MeKaig. 

1  have  repeated  to  you  the  undisputed  law,  that  upon  the  actual 
killing  being  proved  the  law  presumes  that  it  was  willful ;  thai  is, 
intentional,  and  that  it  was  done  with  malice  aforethought ;  that 
i^  was  purposely  done  is  not  denied. 

I  have  reviewed  tiie  evi  lenee  adduced  to  prove  the  inconsistent 
defenses  of  sudden  phrenzy  of  passion  and  of  self-defense.  If 
either  of  them  were  true,  who  so  well  knew  their  truth  as  the 
prisoner  himself?  If  he  had  walked  off  in  silence  he  would  have,  left 
room  for  argument  upon  the  circumstances,  and  the  probable  mo- 
tives which  actuated  him,  to  rebut  the  presumption  of  d.  liberate 
malice.  If  he  had  seen  a  pistol  in  McKaig's  haul,  and  in  appre- 
hension of  imminent  danger  to  his  own  life,  and  m  the  b  m  l  ft  '< 
belief  that  the  instant  killing  of  MeKaig  was  necessary  to  save  his 
own  life,  what  would  have  been  the  natural,  irrepressible  outburst 
from  his' he. irf  and  lips  to  those  around  him  who  had  witnessed  the 
homicide?  Would  he  not  instantly  have  exclaimed,  "he  drew  his 
pistol,!  goi  the  first  shot;  1  was  compelled  to  fake  ids  life  to  save 
my  own.  1  knew  he  was  a  deadly  shot,  and  '  killed  him  in  self- 
defense.''    If  this  had  been  true,  is  it  possible  that  he  should  not 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    m'k.VIO,    JR.  61 

have  tittered  words  to  that  effect?    Then,  if  lie  did  not,  it  was  not 

true;  and  if  not  true  at  the  moment,  it,  is  not  true  now,  and  no  in- 
genuity or  eloquence  can  make  it  true.  Did  he  make  any  such 
utterance?  Bid  lie  assign  any  such  reason  tor  his  act?  Did  he 
walk  off  in  silence,  and  leave  room  for  conflicting  witnesses  and 
ingenious  theories?  No,no!  gentlemen,  f  am  sure  you  must  have 
seared  into  your  memories  the  manner  of  their  utterance,  and  those 
terrible  words  With  which  hte  closed  that  awful  scene.  Leaving 
tin-  prostrate  body  of  the  dead  MeKaig,  he  walked  back  to  the 
pavement  where  the  tragedy  commenced,  levelling-  the  pistol  which 
had  done  the  murderous  wOrk  toward  the  body,  and  those,  who 
were  about  to  remove  it  from  the  street,  he  said  to  t  he  dead  borry-— 
''Tnat  is  what  you  got  for  ruining  my  sister,  and  trying  to  send 

father  to  the  penitentiary,  and  1  have  another  Shot  for  any  d d 

scoundrel  who  says  I  have  done  wrong!"  Is  that  the  language  of 
self-defense?  And  these  words  were  admitted  in  evidence  by  the 
Court,  at  the  instance  of  the  counsel  for  the  prisoner,  as  being  ut- 
tered so  instantly  after  the  act  as  to  form  a  part  of  it.  Then  the 
act  of  killing  and  the  declaration  arc  one.  The  words  explain  the 
act.  They  avow  and  justify  it  for  the  reasons  assigned  ;  they  ex- 
plain that  looking  into  the  window,  of  the  foundry  office  :  the  look- 
ing across  the  bridge;  the  half-hour's  waiting  about  Humbird'sahd 
Cragin's  corners  and  Shriver's  store,  and  the  instant  starting 
toward  McKaig  as  soon  as  he  was  seen  to  cross  the  bridge.  They 
explain  why  that  right  hand  was  kept  in  the  overcoat  pocket.  It 
is  shown  that  it  held  a  deadly,  self-cocking  pistol  for  a  deadly  pur- 
pose ;  they  explain  the  sudden  stride  which  brought  him  side 
by  side  with  his  victim,  and  the  instant  shot  which  sent  the  deadly 
bullet  into  his  vitals,  and  the  fell  purpose  of  revenge  which  fol- 
lowed, with  repeated  shots,  the  wounded  and  dying  man  until  he 
lay  a  motionless  corpse;  they  explain  all ;  they  were  the  outburst 
of  the  pent  up  malice;  they  were  the  result  of  the  night's  medita- 
tions. The  deed  was  done.  Whether  McKaig  was  innocent  or 
guilty  of  his  sister's  ruin,  his  lips  are  now  sealed  in  the  silence  of 
death. 

Another  thing  was  certain  :  he  could  not  appear  as  a  witness  in. 
court  to  send  his  father  to  the  penitentiary.  These  two  purposes 
were  accomplished.  A  young  husband  and  father,  and  one.  of  the 
most  prominent  and  respected  young  men  of  his  county,  had  been 
slain  without  a  word  of  warning.  The  law  had  been  set  at  defiance; 
the  peace,  government,  and  dignity  of  the  State  had  been  out- 
raged, but  even  this  was  not  enough;  the  freedom  of  speech  is  to  be 
silenced  by  the  same  manner  ;  a  snot  is  reserved  for  any  one  who 
should  date  to  pronounce  the  killing  of  -McKaig  a  wrong;  and  this 
is  self-defense ! 

But,  gentlemen,  I  will  detain  you  no  longer  upon  the  facts  of 
this  case  ;  but  as  jurors,  as  citizens,  as  fathers,  as  brothers,  1  beg 
you  to  consider  the  consequences  of  allowing  such  an  outrage  to 
go  unpunished.  1  need  not  say  that  no  man  can  go  beyond  me  in 
abhorrence  of  a  seducer.  I  agree  that  there  have  been  and  may 
be  cases  where  the  enormity  oi  the  crime  is  greater  than  human 
nature  can  bear.  1  agree  that  where  the  fact  is  certain,  and  a 
father  or  brother,  upon  its  discovery,  meets  and  kills  the  seducer 


G2  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

in  a  sudden  transport  of  passion  and  without  malice,  the  off 
is  manslaughter  ami  not  murder.  [  agree  thai  there  is  in  our 
E  teno  adequate  law  for  the  punishmenl  of  seduction  ;  bul  I 
is  no  reas  in  why  yon  should  undertake  to  make  a  law  upon  that 
subject,  or  refuse  to  execute  the  law  thai  does  exist  to  punish 
manslaughter  and  murder  ;  and  especially  it  is  no  reason  why  you 
should  listen  to  an  appeal  in  this  case  to  make  a  law  to  gratify 
what  is  called  "the  moral  sentiment  of  the  civilized  world^" 
(about  a  matter  of  fact  of  which  you  have  not  a  particle  of  evi- 
dence.) whereby  you  are  to  justify  a  man  in  assuming  to  be  judge 
in  his  own,  or  his  sister's,  or  father's  case,  and  to  execute, by  his 
own  hand,  one  o{'  the  highest  prerogatives  of  human  government — 
that  of  taking  human  life.  To  do  tins  is  to  unsetl  le  all  the  foun- 
dations of  civil  society,  to  abolish  government,  and  resolve  society 
into  a  state  of  nature. 

If  what  you  are  told  yon  may  do  was  put  into  the  form  of  law, 
there  is  no  court  in  the  civilized  world,  presided  over  by  judges 
like  Lord  Hobart  or  Lord  Coke,  which  would  not  pronounce  it 
null  and  void,  for,  when  it  is  proposed  in  the  form  of  law,  its  viola- 
tion of  common  sense,  common  justice,  and  natural  equity  becomes 
palpable.    Enacted  into  the  form  of  law  it  would  read  thus  : 

'■Every person,  upon  being  informed  that  his  wife,  daughter, or 
sister  has  been  seduced  into  criminal  intercourse  with  any  man, 
shall  be,  and  he  is  hereby,  constituted  grand  jury,  court,  petit 
jury,  sheriff,  and  executioner,  fully  authorized  and  empowered 
upon  such  information  as  he  may  choose  to  believe,  to  condemn, 
and  a;  his  convience,  and  by  any  means  or  instrument  or  weapon 
of  death  he  may  choose,  to  put  such  man  to  death  without  a  mo- 
ment's notice  or  warning,  and  this  shall  be  deemed  and  held  justi- 
fiable homicide." 

But  I  suppose  such  a  law  could  not  stop  there.  To  prevent  or 
remedy  the  abuse  of  such  license  it  would  be  necessary  to  add  a 
provision  to  this  effect : 

"But  if  any  father  or  brother,  or  relative  of  the  person  slain, 
shall  be  informed  and  believe  that  such  person  was  innocent  of 
such  charge,  or  that  he  had  been  the  victim  of  an  artful  and  lust- 
ful woman,  such  father,  brother,  or  other  relative  shall  have  like 
power  and  authority  to  kill  the  slayer." 

It  certainly  requires  no  argument  to  prove  that  if  such  laws  had 
been  passed  by  any  legislature,  and  introduced  as  law  before  a 
court  presided  over  by  judges  like  Hobart  and  Coke,  they  would 
be  pronunced  null  and  void.  I  adverted  a  few  days  ago  to  decis- 
ions where-.n  these  judges  held  acts  of  Parliament  void  which  were 
against  natural  equity,  and  to  the  admiration  excited  by  their  in- 
trepidity and  powerful  sense  of  justice  in  holding  that  acts  of 
Parliament  are  controlled  by  the  common  law,  which  adjudges 
them  void  when  against  common  right  and  reason.  And  the  very 
example  given  is  an  attempt  to  make  a  man  a  judge  in  his  own 
case. 

It  is  true  the  moral  sentiment  of  the  civilized  world  justly  exe- 
crates the  wanton  destroyer  of  female  virtue  and  domestic  happi- 
ness.    But  let  the  moral  sentiment  and  the  legislative  wisdom  of 


FOR   KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    M*KAIG,   JR.  03 

the  civilized  world  devise  and  enact  a  mode  of  trial  whereby  a 
man  maybe  proved  guilty  before  his  lips  are  sealed  in  death. 
When  so  tried  and  found  guilty,  whether  the  penalty  be  death  or 
the  penitentiary  for  life,  let  the  civilized  world  be  notified  by  legis- 
lative enactment. 

Until  that  is  done  the  law  must  be  executed  as  it  stands,  and  evi- 
dence introduced  to  show  provocation,  great  or  small,  be  confined  to 
its  well-known  legal  limits.  At  least,  such  is  the  view  that  impresses 
itself  upon  my  mind,  and  which,  in  addition  to  what  Was  so  well 
said  and  strongly  argued  by  my  young  friend,  the  State's  attor- 
ney, I  have  felt  it  to  be  my  duty  to  suggest  for  your  consideration. 

I  shall  leave  the  closing  argument  on  behalf  of  the  State  to  the 
able  and  experienced  counsel  who  is  associated  with  us  in  this 
prosecution.  And  thanking  you  for  the  patient  attention  with 
which  you  have  honored  me,  I  leave  the  case,  the  prisoner,  and 
the  consequences,  in  your  hands.  I  have  no  doubt  you  will  hon- 
estly discharge  your  duty  to  the  best  of  your  judgment. 


ARGUMENT 

OF 


FEED.    J.    NELSON,   Esq 


May  it  please  the  Court  and  gentlemen  of  the  Jury,  tho 
learned  gentlemen  with  whom  I  have  the  honor  of  heing  associated 
in  the  trial  of  this  case  ha  to  me  the  duty  of  opening  the 

defense  of  this  youthful  prisoner  at  the  bar.     T  have  tried  many  cases, 

el  it  would  be  affectation  on  my  part  were  I  to  pretend  that  I 
approach  this  case  without  more  than  ordinary  gravity.    The  magni- 

of  the  issue  involved — the  issue  ojf  life  or  death — the  condition  ol 
the  prisoner,  v  I  nany  hard  si  niggles  v.  ith  (  he  cold  and  selfish 

I.  is  just  entering  the  threshold  of  an  honorable  and  successful 
career;  his  youth,  his  intelligence,  his  spotless  character,  without 
blemish,  without  a  stain,  the  hushed  silence  of  this  vast  multitude. 
the  presence  here  of  this  stricken  father,  the  tears  of  this  sorrowing 
motiic]-,  who.  in  {lie  language  of  her  heart',-  own  deep  pathos,  is  "Oh, 
so  desolate  !'t  th  iousness  of  my  own   weakness  and    inabil- 

ity— are  not  all  these,  gentlemen,  sufficient  to  oppress,  nay,  to  over- 
whelm one  of  far  more  power  than  ear,  even  he  aspired  to  by  the 
humble  advocate  who  has  the  honor  ol'  addressing  you?  Yet.  gentle- 
men, amidsl  the  weight  of  this  responsibility,  I  have  one  hope,  one 
lonragement — that  this  case  is  to  he  tried  by  an 
American  jury.     This  one  fad    is  the   star  (hat  will  guide  the  frail 

ithfiil  prisoner  through  the  mad  waves  of  malice  and-' 
revenge   thai    are  surging  around    him,  into  the  haven  of  rest  and 
security.     Let  m  -e,  to  take  a  cursory  glance  a' 

the  character  of  tin  .'  >n.     Why  are  we  here  at  all?    This 

cause  originated  in  Alleghany  county.     Why  i-  it  tried  before  ajury 
of  Frederick  county?     It  i<  th  ;e  of  the  prisoner  to   be  tried 

where  the  a  n  place.     !:   Is  his  privi- 

f  he  sees  I'r.  to  wi  i  lii    trial  from  thai  place  and  submit  it 

tribunal.     Gentlemen,  this  case  was  almo>t  on  trial' 

.     Ten  jurors  v  II  and  truly  try  the  issue,  and 

"in  this  •"  -  who 

stepped  in?  The  State.  OVhy,  gentlemen,  those  who  are  prosecut- 
ing here  are  powerful,  rich,  am  .  |  Their  influence  pervades  all 
the  hills  of  the  Alleghaney'  a  fair  and  impa 
trial  in  Alleghany  could  the  honest  yeomen 
who  consti  jurors  of  thai  county?  Gentlei  I  I  pause 
to  answer?  Doe-  not  the  question  itsoll  ■  re- 
ply to  your  own  mind-'.-  constitution  of  I,  in 
its  Bill  of  Rights,  is  ;  tion  that  ought  to  have  secured  to  this 
man  a  trial  where  li               known  ;  where  he  has  be 


66  TRIAL   OF   II. \K;,    CRAWFORD   BLACK 

from  infancy  up  to  young  manhood;  where  his  incomings  and  out- 
goings are  known  to  everybody,  and  where  there  could  nol  be  supposed 
to  be  any  prejudices  surrounding  him,  pro  or  eon.  There,  in  the  midst, 
of  the  people  who,  it  has  been  said  in  this  cause,  were  outraged  by 
this  transaction,  he  bad  elected  to  cast  his  fortunes,  and  toabidethe 
issue.  You  have  been  told,  outside  of  the  evidence,  and  in  a  cause 
involving  a  human  life,  that  all  Cumberland  was  greatly  incensed; 
that  the  public  heart  beat  with  indignation  at  the  outrage  that  was 
perpetrated  upon  one  of  its  eitizens.  tfso,  was  there  an>  danger  that 
this  young  man  would  have  received  special  favor  from  that  commu- 
nity? It  boj  was  not  the  state  in  a  condition  to  receive,  net  onlyia 
fair  and  impartial  trial,  but  was  it  not  invited  to  a  contest,  with  all 
these  predilictions  thus  formed  in  the  mind  of  that  coinmuuity 
against  the  prisoner  at  the  bar? 

"The  trial  ol'  tacts,*'  says  the  constitution  of  your  own  State, 
"  where  they  arise,  is  one  of  the  greatest  securities  of  the  lives,  liber- 
ties, and  estates  of  the  people.'1  This  is  not  the  language  of  mere 
declamation.  It  was  not  incorporated  into  this  constitution  bythe 
convention — the  learned  attorney  general  himself  penning  this  very 
article,  as  one  of  the  committee  on  the  Bill  of  Rights — as  a  rhetorical 
flourish;  He  did  not  write  it  there  as  mere  empty  sentiment.  It  had 
been  the  usage  in  the  times  gone  by,  through  which  our  revolutionary 
fathers  struggled,  to  take  a  prisoner  from  his  place  of  residence,  where 
the  facts  surrounding  the  particular  transaction  were  well  known  ; 
from  among  those  who  knew  his  character  and  associations,  and  carry 
him  oil  to  distant  parts  for  the  purpose  of  having  him  tried  among 
strangers.  This  was  the  outrage,  this  was  the  violation  of  the  sacred 
privilege?,  of  the  inalienable  rights  of  the  individual  citizen  that  the 
constitution  of  Maryland  put  its  seal  of  condemnation  upon  ;  this  is  the 
reason  Why,  through  its  commit  tee  man,  the  attorney  general,  as  though 
it  were  written  in  letters  of  living  light,  it  caused  it  to  lie  proclaimed 
"that  the  trial  of  facts  where  they  arise," — not  elsewhere — "  is  one  of 
the  greatest  .securities  of  the  lives,  liberties,  and  estates  of  the  people." 

I  might  go  so  far,  without  risking  my  reputation  as  a  lawyer,  as  to 
declare  that  the  removal  of  this  cause  by  the  State  is  in  direct  contra- 
vention of  the  epiril  of  its  fundamental  Bill  of  Rights.  Why  was  this 
prisoner  at  the  bar  dragged  from  his  home  down  into  the  midst  of 
Strangers,  where  he  is  unknown;  where  witnesses  are  unknown; 
where  not  a.  friendly  countenance  greets  him  from  the  jury-box?  Was 
it  in  order  that  he  might  have  none  of  those  very  surroundings  which 
the  law  regards  as  his  sacred  right — the  "greatest  security  of  the. 
lives,  liberties,  and  estates  of  the  people?"  1  will  not  dwell  further, 
gentlemen  of  the  jury,  on  this  question,  though  it  is  one  that  falls 
properly  within  your  province  to  answer.  But,  before  I  enter  into  the 
argument  proper  of  this  case,  let  me  glance  at  some  of  the  views  put 
forth  by  the  learned  attorney  general  of  the  State,  and  let  me  direct 
your  minds  somewhat  to  the  character  of  this  prosecution,  as  is  illus- 
trated thereby,  that  we  may  have  the  full  benefit  of  the  impartiality'  .of 
the  one,  and  a,  proper  appreciation  of  the  temper  of  the  other.  What 
is  the  duty  of  the  State  in  presenting  a  prisoner  fortrial  before  a  jury? 
One  man  has  been  slain,  lie  was  a  citizen  of  the  State.  Another 
man  is  charged  with  that  slaying.  He  is  also  a  citizen  of  the  State. 
Their  lives  are  equally  dear  to  the  State,  the  one  as  the  other.  The 
'State  wills  the  death  of  no  man.     The  State  wills  to  punish  no  man  ; 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    M  KAIG,   JR.  07 

and  when  one  of  her  citizens  is,  therefore,  brought  to  a  trial,  she  sur- 
rounds him  with  all  those  immunities,  all  those  privileges  which  insure 
him  a  lair,  imparl  ial  investigation.  To  this  end  she  bas  selected  her 
officers — the  attorney  general,  who  is  the  prosecuting  attorn  y  for  all 
the  State,  and  the  special  attorney  for  this  county.  She  says  to  them, 
when  she  clothes  them  with  this  attribute  of  her  power,  proseci  ; 
not  persecute;  see  that  the  Slate  suffers  no  detriment;  but  also 
see  that  the  prisoner  at  the  bar  receives  a  fair,  impartial  trial. 
She  says  to  them,  do  your  whole  duty  as  public  officers,  but  take 
not  the  life  of  a  citizen  by  the  suppression  of  the  truth,  or  by  testi- 
mony that  is  illegitimate.  I  say  it  is  judicial  murder  for  a  prosecut;- 
ing  attorney  to  put  one  tittle  of'UVtUeilCti  before  the  jury  not  war- 
ranted by  the  law.  when  that  t ill le  may  send  to  eternity  a  prisoner  at 
the  bar,  just  as  much  as  il  would  he  judicial  murder  in  that,  tribunal, 
the  Court,  to  sentence  a,  man  to  be  hanged  who  was  not  convicted  of  a 
capital  crirae^ikgaitt,  gentlemen,  it  is  of  the  same  character  of  crime 
to  comment  on  facts,  to  the  injury  of  t  he  prisoner,  which  are  no  in 
evidence.  I  announce  this  as  a  principle  of  morals  ;  1  announce  it  as  I 
a  principle  of  law. 

Now,  let  us  apply  this  principle  as  we  go  aloug.  The  learned  at- 
torney general  opens  a  very  able  and  very  interesting  address  by  dep- 
recating an  appeal  to  your  sympathies.  lie  told  you  that  you  must 
steel  your  hearts ;  that  you  musl  make  of  yourselves  blocks  of  wood, 
lumps  of  stone  and  iron.  Gentlemen  of  the  jury,  why  have  we 
institution  of  a  trial  hy  jury  ?  Let? me  ask  you  why  am  I  not  consti- 
tuted a  juror?  Why  are  not  the  members  of  this  bar  constituted 
jurors?  Why  is  not  that  tribunal,  the  judges,  learned  in  the  law,  con- 
stituted the  jury,  the  triers  of  your  Bellow-citizens  when  they  are  put 
upon  trial  for  a  criminal  eharge?  Why?  For  this  reason,  and  tins' 
alone — and  this  is  the  answer  to  the  deprecation  we  have  heard  here 
— because  you  come  from  the  body  of  the  people;  because  our  pro-j 
fession,  in  a  manner,  curs  us  off  from  the  common  feeling  of  the  peo- 
ple upon  these  subjects ;  because  our  minds  are  educated  in  a  particu- 
lar line,  and,  1  am  Borry  to  say,  too  often  in  a  school  of  very  narrow 
technical  jurisprudence.  Therefore,  for  the  purpose  of  avoiding  thi 
very  evil  of  education,  for  the  purpose  of  easting  to  the  winds  this; 
mere  technical  banging  of  a  man,  the,  law  selects  from  the  body  of  the 
people  those  whose  hearts  are,  iii  a  peculiar  manner,  in  sympathy  with 
their  fellow-citizen  upon  all  subjects  ;  who  know  his  mode  of  thought; 
w  ho  can  appreciate  his  motives  ;  who  can  dive  down  into  and  fathom, 
and  feel  wiih  his  feeling*  Because,  for  the  very  reason  the  veryoppo-i 
site  to  that  given  by  the  learned  attorney  for  the  state;  because  you! 
are  wit  blocks  of  stooe  ;  because  J  on  are  not  steel  and  iron,  but  living, 
quivering  flesh  and  blood,  like  the  prisoner  on  trial.  For  thai  rea 
gentlemen ol  the  jury,  you  are  selected,  But'tKigtieprecation  of  sym- 
pathy, of  course,  was  perfectly  fair  upon  the  pari  of  the  leamedat- 
tomey  general  for  the  State.  Was  it?  Mind,  I  charge  him  here  with 
in*  unfair  motive,  but  I  do  say  that  he  has  been  carried  away  by  the 
zealot  i he  prosecutor.  Honorable,  learned,  dignified,  religious,  con- 
scientious, an  know  him  to  be,  yethe  has  been  carried  away  by  the 
mere  zeal  of  the  advocate  who  struggles  for  victory.  Why  did  he, 
afterdeprecatiug-an  appeal  to  your  sympathies;  paint  a  picture  toyqu 
that  was  enough  lo  awaken  sympathy  in  every  bo3om.  Did  be  not 
paint  the  family  of  the  deceased  here  before  you  in  all  the  habiliments 


08  TRIAL    07    HARRY   C  V.CK. 

of  woe.'    Did  he  no  our  pity  for  !'  •■.  your 

iathy  for  th"  mourning  brothers,  yonr  tears  for  the  lamenting 
.-  Were  you  nol  taken  to  the  home  of  the  hnsbandless  mother, 
and  were  you  noi  told  that  in  every  passing  breeze  there  was'awail 
from  her  widowed  bosom,  "  Where,  whore  is  my  hnsl  i 
thai  an  appeal  for  your  sympathy?  Was  it  wrong  in  the  de 
Then,  is  it  right  in  the  prosecution?  I  ask  you,  was  this  deprecation 
ir  appeals  t  o  jrour  sympathy  b  •  •■;!  .'■;•  tmin 

re,  or  was  it  no  '      alrhetOTica^H^insJves  whic 

might  serve  to  roun  1  en :  period  of  th"  orator,  in'  >pardy 

til''  safety  of  an  innocent  man  ? 

Gentlemen,  let  me  pause  here  one  moment,  to  make  a 
mark.     I  believe,  if  I  have  one  characteristic  above  another,  ii   i-  that 
of  kindliness  of  feeling.     I  reg  for  myown  sake  (i  am 

h  enough  to  say  so)  1  i  adds  to  the  pain  fulness  of  rnj 

;re1  to  find  the  father  and  the  other  members  of  the  family  of  the 
attending  upon  this  trial,  because  i  mayb    c  I,  in  the 

=e  of  the  remarks  that  I  prop     •  I  ■    ubmil  to  y  some- 

.■■  i  hal  will  »vibrate  thfcre  :  an  I.  as  there 

•  me,  to  judge  us  all,  il  makes  my  Ii  art  bleed  to  think 
that  such  is  my  necessity.  1  know  not.  gentlemen,  why  they  are 
h  ';'  i    of  W.  W.  McKaig  ha  to' a  blissful  home  be- 

yond '  liopeithas;  if  ii  is  there  in  eomm union  with  that 

,!i,  think  yon  it  will  look  down  with  pleasure 
■  young  life.     Xay.  would  ii 
ling  the  in  e  pr  isence  in  which  ii   stand  .   ■ 

i       »nes  of  son      .  ••  let  the  sinner  live  and  repent.'1    Can  it 

i  d  of  this  young  man  will  ea      ■  -s  to  bloom 

new-made  grave,  teach  bereavement  to  pass 
ved  heart,  or  heal  one  bleeding  wound  of 
I  g  fat! 

I  pass,  gentlemen,  from  this  theme,  for  it  is  equally  painful  lo  me  as 
it  must  be  to  you.    I  come  now  to  another  point  in  t! 
al's   remarks.     With  all  th"  earnestness  that   belongs  tb'him  he  de- 
;        :  to ;  ,  bjr  the  'a.  her  of  Hi"  prisoner  at  the  h 

fcKaig,     Why  was  this?    Itwi  pi  of  pro- 

his  imp.-  :  '  itirig  by  fie  fatli 

some  two  mom  .    the  shooting  by  young  Black;  t'l 

.  i   I       rhy  anil  the  wherefore  of  t  hat  sho! 
Now.  that  is  an  importan  .  in  the- estimation  of  the  learned  pros- 

It  is  par!  i  -y  ofthe  ■  I 

McKaig  in  a  phre-nzi  ion  of  mind,  occasioned  bylearningof 

the  killing.    They   say  ii'  we  can 
show  that  the  s  I  Mr.  Black,  which  was  for  the  a 

two  weeks  or  ■•  tin'  shooting  by  young 

i      :k,  they  ma;  iviacl  withtheirexc  len  they 

this  jury  that  he  was  unac  :d  v  t\\    '  ;  condition  Of  his  sistur 

until  the  night   b<  Away        n  goes  the  the&ryof 

u  phrenzy.    That  is  the  idea.     Gentlemen,  upon  thatrriayhang 

th''  life  of  this  prisoner.     Now,  then,  What  are  we  to  say  when  v., 

ery  testimony,  intended  for  the  pilr  ig  an  infer- 

'  may  hang  this  man,  the  fabrication  ofthe  brain  of  attoi 

outside  of  the  evidence,  with  hoi  one  whisper  bf  truth  in  ii  ?    <  ienfcle- 
men,  th"  learned  attorney  for  the  Mai.'  i-  only  excusable  because  he 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    M'KAIG,    JR.  69 

was  nol  here  when  the  testimony  was  put  before  this  court,  and  ruled 
(.in.  if  he  had  bee,u  presenl  \yhen  ir  was  sought  to  put  in  thai  testi- 
mony, and  knew  of  its  being  ruled  out,  so  help  me  God,  i  would  b 

an  attempted  murderer.     I  spare  no  man  who  attempts  to  take 
fe  of  another  by  illegitimate  testimony  or  by  forcing  infer 
upon  the  jury  which  have  been  excluded  by  the  honorable  bench.     Is 

ie of  prosecution,  tli  .  :  "itimate?  I  have  two  reasons  w 
refer  i<>  these  things.  <  >ne  is  to  show  yon  how  easity  the  earnestness, 
the  overleaping  anxiety  thai  actuates  this  prosecution  in  the  pursuit  of 
the  prisoner  al  the  bar  may  clqud  and  warp  the  judgment.  I  have 
another  reason.  If  the  officer  of  the  law,  he  who  is  acting  under  the 
sanction  of  his  official  oath,  can  so  far  allow  that  official  dray  to  be 
clouded,  overcast,  by  the  zeal  pf  his  own  advocacy,  how  much  more 
have  we.  not  to  fear  from  another  of  the  learned  counsel  lor  the  S 

■  zeal  and  ingenuity  may  be  inflamed  and  sharpened  by  the 
stimulating  influence  of  private  reward?  For  we  have  here  not  only 
ail  the  official  sanction  to  this  prosecution  of  the  highest  legal  officer  of 

ate  and  of  the  regular  attorney  of  the  county,  hut  we  have  here 
a  private  prosecutor,  whose  appointment,  it  is  said,  has  beenconflrmed 
by,  the  court.     Iknownot  who  employs  tJ  tionaL  supernumer- 

aries, or  who  appoints   them,  or  who  confirms  them,  especially  the 
learned  counsel  who  is  put  here,  with  all  his  ingenuity,  all  his  I 
criminal  practice,  to  wind  up  this  prosecution.    I  do  notknow,  n< 
i.   ■  i    lo  .knovy;  tha,t,  in  another  case  of  murder  tried  this  ti 
there   was  neither  appointment   nor  confirmation ;    but  the  leu 

-  attorney  for  the  county  was  left  to  his  own  resources.     I  am 
ue  with  the  mod-  in  which  this  prosecution  hasbeem 
dueled,  bytl  lattorney  general  of  the  State.     Do  you  remember 

his  detail  of  the  conversation  that  occurred  between  Mr.  Lowndes  and 

;  >ther  of  this  prisoner?      ih;  became  elocpient   upon  that.     lie 
told  you  that,  in  that  conversation, ;when  .Mr.  L<   vndes  Was  insis 
that  hi:-  sistershould  ret  urn.  for  the  purpose  of  being  a  witness  in  his 

ir's  ease,  that  3ir>.  Black  declined  lo  have  her  return  for  t  ha! 
po.-e.     He  told  you  thai  she  had  declared,  her  willingness  to  sact 
iter  own  life,  mi    .  :e  Tier  husband  rot  in  the  dung 

of  i  ie  peui  .     "And  all  for  what?"  he  asked.    The  learned 

attorney  general  found  area-on.    Because  she  knew  thai  the  char 

ion  w.is  false.     She  was  afraid  to  have  her  daughter  confront 
alleged  seducer,     lie  could  give  no  higher  reason  for  this  mother's 

d  to  have  her  daughter  broughi  here,  into  the  witness  box. 
could  dive  no  deeper  into  the  female  i  .cart  and  discover  i  he  true  rea 
Yy"  iih  as  kindly  a  disposition  as  the  learned  at  i  on  icy  general  is  known 

issess,  1  did  not  expeel   so  u  igenerous  a  construction  oJ  an;. 
ized  mother's  heart.     But  that   is  not  all;  that  is  the  least.     He 

upon  that  an  argument,  without  the  establish menl  of  which 
whole  prosecution  falls;  for,  from  that  conversation,  he  has  Lie 
the  moiiveoi  the  crime, and  the  only  motive,  as  1  will  endeavor  to 
show  you.  gentlemen,  when  1  conic  to  that  branch  of  i he  case.. 

Now,  follow  me  closely,  and  ii  d  me  if  i  am  not  righl  w  hen  1  saj  that 
this  prosecution  is  carried  on  with  an  over-wroughi  zeal,  and  thai 

,\  roughl  zeal  is  supplying  tacts  where  the  evidence  omits  to  sup- 
ply them.    What  docs  he  tell  you?    He  tells  you  that  young  Black  -hot 
McKaig.     Why?    For  the  purpose  of  getting  rid  of  him  as  a  wil 
in  th  e,  but  in  the  case  against  his  lather.    Get 


TRIAL   OF  HARRY   CRAWFORD    BLACK 

How?    He  was  present  When  his  mother  refused  to  have 

•  ercomehome.  The  attorney  general  says  that  his  ol  etting 

McKaig  was  in  order  that  his  sister  mighi  stand  unconl  radicted, 

and  thus  clear  the  father.    Gentlemen, -before  you  can  arrive  a!  that 

ision,  what  isnecessary?    Ii  is  necessary  for  you  to  find  this  fact, 

5  oung  Black  knew  it ;  that  it  had  been  communicated  to  him  that 

ister  was  coming  home.     Now,  did  he  know. thai  fact?    The  afc- 

i         v  general  tells  you  that  the  mother  refused;  upon  any  considera- 

.  to  have  her  daughter  return,  and  that  young  Black  heard  her  so 

■.     Now,  when  and  how  did  lie  learn  that  his  sister  was  to  return? 

i,  it  is  not  shown  in  the  evidence  thai  he  did  learn  it,  then  these  gen- 

l     men  have  overstepped  the  bounds  of  legitimate  prosecution  when 

undertake  to  inter  it.     I  announce  as  law,  in  the  presence  of  the 

learned  gentlemen,  that  yon  can  infer  no  fact   for  the  purpose  of  arriv- 

ingat  a  conclusion,  hut  yon  musl    prove  every  step  that    brings  yon 

1   toward  thai  conclusion.     Nothing  must  he  inferred,  because,  if  true,  it. 

ild  account  for  the  facts.    Can  yon  arrive  at  the  motive,  attributed 

to  young  Black  by  the  learned  attorney  forthe  State,  without  inferring 

that  young  Black  knew  that  his  sister  was  to  return  home  ?     if,  when 

yon  go  to  your  jury  box,  one  juror  suggests  to  the  other,  "Why.  of 

iheknewit;  the  learned  attorney  for  the  State  has  shown-that 

la-  knew  it,"  answer  him  thus  :  '•  By  the  irresistible  power  of  law  ami 

logic,  find  me  in  the  evidence  the 'fact  that  the  sister's  return  was 

municated  to  young  Black."    If  yon  do  not  so  tind  it  it,  is  ridfca 

fact  in  the  cause.  What  I  am  now  saying,  gentlemen,  is  to  pnl  yen 

on  your  guard  against  the  style  of  tins  prosecution;  and  to  show 

you  that  with  all  their  professions  of  sympathy,  and  with  all  their 

declarations  of  fairness  and  impartiality,  these  gentlemen,  prose- 

cutors,  have  allowed  their  judgment  to  be  run  away  witii  by  their 

zeal  for  their  cause. 

There  isanotherassumption  of  the  learned  gentleman  that  might 
as  well  lie  noted  here,  because  lie  deemed  it  of  sufficient  import- 
ance tdDe  put  to  this  jury.  Gentlemen,  if  a.  witness  bad  hen  put 
on  that  stand  and  asked  this  question:  k'  Did  you  ever  haveacon- 
versation  with  William  W.  McKaig  in  his  life  time?"  and  he 
should  reply,  " yes, "  and  he  should  he  further  asked,  V  did.  you 
ever  hear  William  W.  McKaig  deny  that  he  was  the  seducer  of 
Harry  Black's  sister?"  lie  would  be  stopped,  and  without  argu- 
ment, the  learned  Court  would  rule  the  answer  inadmissible.  That 
is  a  clear  proposition.  Now,  if  that  be  so,  if  it  he  true  that  it 
would  be  ruled  out  as  incompetent  evidence,  is  it  admissible  to 
put  that  supposed  fact  in,  in  any  way?  If  it  is  not  competent  to 
have  that  fact  spoken  to,  by  a  man  who  is  under  oath  to  speak  the 
truth,  would  it  be  legitimate  or  competent  to  put  it  in.  from  the 
mouth  of  an  unsworn  attorney  in  the  case?  Clearly  not.  Yet, 
that  fact  lias  been  laid  before  you.  Why  was  it  done  ?  We  must 
presume  that  the  gentleman  was  In  earnest.  It  was  done  for 
the  purpose  of  putting  before  the  jury  a  supposed  fact  which  could 
not  be  put  in  before  them  in  the  legitimate  course  of  the  exami- 
nation of  witnesses,  lie  tells  you  that  William  XT.  McKaig  never 
did  seduce  this  girl,  llowdoes  he  know  it?  Did  he  learn  i  Lin  this 
cause  or  out  of  this  cause?  If  in  the  cause,  what  witness  told  him 
so?  Give  us  the  evidence,  Mr.  Attorney  General.  If  out  of  the. 
cause,  let  me  ask,  does  the  State  employ,  appoint,  or  confirm  its 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    MjKAKJ,    JB,  71 

prosecuting  officers  to  convict  a  man  of  a  capital  offense  by  state- 
ments made  to  them  by  irresponsible  parties  not  sworn  as  wit- 
nesses? [sthis'  the  kind  of  prosecution  to  deal  with  human  life?  I 
may  reply  to  this  unsworn  assertion,  however,  by  saying,  gentlemen 
of  the  jury,  that  this  testimony  of  seduction  which  we  tried  to  in- 
troduce, and  which  was  fought  against  <>  whoh  day  by  the  counsel  for 
the  State  was  ruled  out  by  the  Court.  If  we  were  allowed  to  go 
■  into  that  testimony  we  would  show  you  the  seduction.  We  would 
open  up  a  Story  here  that  would  harrow  your  sonls.  and  make 
leach  particular  hair  stand  on  end.  We  would  introduce  the  sedu- 
cer into  this  lions:-;  we  would  show  yon  how  he  carried  her  from 
the  hearthstone;  aye.  bow  he  tracked  her  after  his  own  marriage 
■with  an  honorable  woman,  tracked  her  to  the  city  of  Baltimore, 
jand  in  the  public  hotel  prostituted  her  to  his  Inst.  I  say  all  this 
is  not  in  evidence,  hut  it  is  a  legitimate  reply  to  the  non-evidence 
testimony  given  by  the  unsworn  officer  of  tin1  State.  This  is  a, 
part  of  the  paraphanalia  of  this  prosecution.  This  is  the  style  of 
argument  made,  and  in  a  ease  where  the  life  of  a  human  being 
may  depend  upon  the  impression  made  upon  your  minds  by  the 
eloquence  of  counsel. 

Now,  gentlemen,  I  must  pass  from  the  learned  attorney  gen- 
eral of  the  Stale;  turn  from  the  line  of  argument  of  the  prose- 
cutor, to  the  prosecution,  itself;  to  the  facts  and  circumstance  of 
this  >',{<■(•  as  they  realy  are;  as  theyare  developed  by  I  he  tesl  imony 
and  not  as  they  exist  m  imagination  of  counsel  or  are  painted  by 
the  overwrought  zeal  of  the  advocate. 

On  the  17th  day  of  October,  ls70,  there  occurred  in  the  streets 
of  Cumberland,  a  collision  between  two  young  gentlemen,  each  a 
member  of  a,  highly  respectable  family;  one  a  wealthy  .family; 
the  other  a,  family  in  ordinary — 1  was  about  to  say  comfortable 
circumstances,  but  it  would  be  more  in  accordance,  perhaps,  with 
the  truth,  to  say,  uncomfortable  circumstances.  In  that  collision 
one  of  the  young  men  lost  Ins  life;  and  the  inquiry  here  is.  how 
that  lite  was  lost.  It  is  charged  iu  the  indictment  that  the  taking 
of  that  life  was  a  malicious,  premeditated  murder.  William  W. 
McKaig  was  t  iie  slain  man;  Harry  Crawford  Black  was  the  slayer. 
These  facts  are  admitted.  Biack  is  put  on  trial  upon  that  indict- 
ment; to  this  indictment  the  prisoner  has  pleader  1  not  gui  ty.and 
has  set  up  two  defenses— self-defense  and  a phrenzied  condition  of 
mind  at  the  t  inn'  of  t  he  killing. 

JS'ow,  let  ns  t  ake  the  facts,  and  see  whether  or  not  this  shooting 
was  done  m  self-defense.  In  the  first  place,  t  lie  State  must-  prove! 
what  it  alleges.  1 1  will  not  do  to  prove  I  he  killing  only,  but  they 
must  prove  that  it  was  a  malicious  killing,  and  with  malice  afore- 
thought. We-  will  confine  ourselves  for  tlie  pivs  nit  to  one  branch 
of  this  inquiry  alone,  and  see  whether  fiom  the  facts  there  devel- 
oped, if  is  possible  for  this  jury  to  com  •  to  the  conclusion  sought 
by  the  State  and  necessary  to  lie  proven  by  if.  Who  fired  lie 
shot?  who  was  the  first  aggressor?  How  do  weget  at  this  fact? 
Now ,  look  at  It,  gentlemen,  in  the  light  of  common  reason.  You 
are  put  here  because  you  are  supposed  to  be  besl  able  to  judge  of 
the  facts  that  ordinarily  surround  human  transactions.  VVhere  do 
you  find  who  fired  the  first  shot?  There  are  but  two  witnesses  in 
chief  for  the  si  ate;  you  do  not  find  it  from  the  testimony  of  Dr. 


I'l  TRIAL    OF    BARRY    CRAWFORD    BLA< 

Healy.  and  you  do  nol  find  it  from  the  testimony  of  Mr.  Gross; 
but  it  is  said  that  Dr.  Healy  witnessed  the  first  shot. 

Mr.  Syester.  No.  sir;  Dr.  Healy  did  nol  seethe  firsl  shot. 

Mr.  '  ted  by  ray  colleague,  who  reminds  me 

that  Dr.  Healy  did  not  see  the  firsl  shot.  'Puis  makes  this  view 
of  the  cisc  still  stronger,  [f  neither  Dr.  Healy  nor  Mr.  Gross  wit- 
nessed H.  who,  thru,  did?  \' >  line.  Every  witness  who  has  been 
examined  testifies  that  the  first  shot  was  Bred,  and  then  all  that 
was  seen  was  observed  after  that  first  shot. 

Now,  William  W.  McKaig  was  killed,  and  by  Black:  that  is 
true.  But  is  it  a,  fair,  logical  deduction  from  that  fact  that,  be- 
cause he  was  killed  by  Black,  therefore  Black  was  the  first 
sssor;  that  he  fired  the  first  shot.  That  would  be  a  most  irn- 
pot  ut.  conclusion,  gentlemen,  because  we  frequently  see  the  first 
assailant  get  the  worse  of  the  encounter.  How,  then,  I  ask  again, 
do  you  arrive  at  the  fact  of  who  was  the  first  assailant?  !f  you 
no  witness  here  to  prove  that  fact  distinctly,  how  are  you  to 
get  at  itr  Save  and  except  by  the  illogical  inference  that  because 
McKaig  waskillvdand  Black  killed  him,  thai ,  therefore,  Black  was 
the  first  assailant.  But  if  we  admit  that  Black  did  fire  the  first 
shot,  still  this  does  not  suffice,  but  only  brings  us  to  this  inquiry, 
did  .McKaig  have  in  his  hands  at  the  time  of  that  encounter,  a 
pistol?  Let  us  examine  this  matter,  gentlemen;  eveu  upon  its 
probabilities  alone.  Dr.  Healy  says,  "No,  McKaig  had  no  pistol," 
Mr.  Gross  says,  "No,  he  had  no  pistol."  In  other  words,  each  of 
these  gentlemen  say  this:  "1  did  not  see  a  pistol."  That  is  all 
that  they  could  mean,  when  they  say  that  lie  had  no  pistol. 

We  are  now  upon  the  probabilities.  Admit  that  Healyand  Gross— * 
two  men — did  not  see  the  pistol;  there  are  Six  men  who  testify 
that  they  did  see  a  pistol  in  the  hands  of  the  deceased.  First, 
Charles  Medore;  he  was  standing  in  the  window,  it  is  not  pre- 
tended that  he  had  not  just  as  fair  a,  view,  and  just  as  good  ari 
opportunity  as  Dr.  Healy  of  observing  all  that  was  going  on  lie 
stands  upon  an  equality  with  Healy.  It  there  is  one  thing  in  favor 
of  one  or  the  other,  it  would  be  the  youthful  vision  of  Mr.  Medore. 
lie  is  just  as  honest  a  man  as  Dr.  Healy;  he  stands,  in  the  city  of 
Cumberland,  in  his  sphere  in  life,  quite  as  honorably  as  Dr.  Ilealy 
in  his  sphere  of  life;  he  exhibited  no  anxiety  on  this  point;  if  a. 
partisan  he  failed  to  show  it,  and  in  this  particular  he  wiil  com- 
pare most  favorably  with  Dr.  ilealy.  Yet,  lie  saw  the  transaction 
in  and  about  the  same  time  that  ilealy  saw  it.  Ilealy  did  nol 
the  pistol,  Medore  did;  who  is  to  lie  believed?  Jurors  somel  Lines 
in  a  civil  case,  where  the  proof  is  about  evenly  balanced,  will  toss 
up  a  penny,  and  decide  the  case  by  heads  or  tads,  and  in  such  a 
Case  parties  may  be  willing  to  risk  a  verdict  in  that  way.  But  in 
a  criminal  case  where  the  testimony  is  nearly  evenly  balanced; 
where  both  witnesses  are  equally  worthy  of  credit,  not  only  are 
you  not  at  liberty  to  toss  the  pennj  to  decide  the  question,  but  you 
are  bound  under  your  oath,  as  laid  down  even  in  the  musty  books 
of  the  prosecution,  to  give  your  verdict  in  behalf  of  the  prisoner, 
upon  the  doubt  that  is  engendered  under  such  circumstances. 

Qo  another  step — Charles  Clark  saw  this  matter,  lie  was  in 
Medore's  store;  does  he  contradict  him?  It  will  not  do  to  reflect 
upon  Charles  Clark,  because  Clark  comes  here,  signed,  sealed,  and 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    M  KAIG,    JR.  i.3 

endorsed  "good,"  by  fclie  pro  They  summoned  Ijjm 

and  accredited  hinx to  this  jury  as  worthy  of  all  belief, 
from   the  credit  which  their  summons  gives  him,  he  bore  upon 
his  front  the  simple  truth  of  childhood's  .         id  1      stood 

in  that  box,  ami  witli  a   simple,  unsophisticated   face  of  inno- 
cence, told  you   the  truth,  as  it  was  in  him.     tie  said   he  saw 
the  pistol.  Why  should  he  say  so,  if  it  were  nol  true?  Has  he  1 
bought?  Men  do  not  buy  children  when  they  al  tempt  to  make  up 
a  defi  i  lie  force  of  gold.   They  buy  astute,  cunning,  shrewd 

scoundrels.     You  do  not  go  and  take  the  young  sprouts  tha 
as  yet  unlearned  in  the  iniquities  of  the  world,  and  are.  ant  to 
trip  and  fail  in  their  first  efforts  at  villainy. 

Was  this  boy  mistaken?  Wherefore  mistaken  more  than  Dr. 
Healy?  Was  he  of  defect  ive  vision?  Fully  would  he  compare  with 
Dr.  Elealy  in  that  particular.  Is  he  an  honest  bpyV  Surely  his 
character  stands  as  high  in  his  sphere  as  Dr.  Healy 's  does  in  his 
sphere.  Why,  they  both  have  sworn  to  the  truth  as  it  was  iu  each 
of  them.  Both  may  go  this  instant  before  the  Throne  of  all  Truth., 
though  they   have  given  contra  ,  and   yel 

equally  pure  in  the  pres<  teDeity.  Why?  Because  they  have 

sworn  to  what  they  supposed  to  be  true.     It  is  all  i  ii,   . 

But  you,  gentlemen  are  to  find  positive,  not  relative  truth,  and 
that  beyond,  a  reasonable  doubt.  \  you  to  do  so  from 

testimony  without  the  power  of  Omniscience?    Wolf  swore  to  the 
same  thing 

An  effort  has  been  made  to  break  down  h  tony  of  ' 

Why?  Because  it.  is  said  by  <  irneys  of  the  Mate,  that 

while  he  was  testifying  he  stood  with  large  drops  of  sweat  foi 
themselves  down  his  cheeks.  Gentlemen,  it  is  not  every  man 

sufficient  nerve  to  appear  upon  the  witness  stand  unmoved. 
No  damaging  infereuce  can  be  drawn  from  that;  no  inference,  o- 
if  inieivi!  ii,  it  is  more  frequent  >f  honesty 

and  truth  than  it  is  of  hardihood  and  villainy.    Wolf  saw  I 

observation  was  just  as  unobstructed  as  D'\  Ileal;,'.-..     Dr. 
tion  to  these  two  appro  iiung  men; 

and  he  observed  ti»em;  .  his  statement  of   facts,  aud  Dr. 

Healy  gives  his.     Who  is  right,  and  who  is  wrong?     We 
wiiii-  i  is  i        i  right,  which  really  wrong;  only  give  us  tins  , 
it  is  all  we  ask,  that  tin  aringtowhat< 

supposes  that  he  saw,  or  did  uot si       that  is  all  •  will 

decide  between  them  beyond  a  reasonable  doubt  of  deciding'  erro- 
neously t 

William  Wolf  could  |  :,    i  if  he  was  swearing  to  that 

winch   was  false;  he  is  op. mi  to  impeachment.     We  would 
to  have  seen  the  effort  made  to  impeach  him;  we   would  have 
made  the  fortune  of  the  telegraph   by  summonin 
Cumberland  here  to  vindicate   his  Garner  saw 

i]    in  the  hands  i.i  witnesses 

saw  it;  Dr.  Etumelshiue  saw  something  fall  near  the  curb  wl 
he  supposed  to  be  u  pistol.  Nowhere,  are  allot  these  witue 
Medore,  Clark,  Wolf,  Hipp,  Garner,  and  Dr.  llumelshine,  i 

:   them  swearing  to  the  pistol  eithet 
sion,  in   tl  I  of   McKaig,  or  failing  from  his  hand. 


7-A  TRIAL    OF    HARRY.    CRAWFORD   BLACK 

This  is  the  great  I  ►wiTtg  facl  in  tins  brai 

What  now  are  you  to  (Jo?    You  are  to  find  the  malicious  shoot- 
ing, if  it  exists,  and  discard  the  theory  of  sfllf-defense;  you; 
find  it  upon  a  Legal  certainty;  that    is,  without:  any  reasonable, 
national  doubt.    Can  you  find  it  under  the  circumstances  of  this 
testimony  without  doing— what?   Sup  vo  witnesses  testi 

Beeing  a  pistol,  and  two  testify  to  not  seeing  it.  That  is  toler- 
ably equal  balance.  But  in  order  i  i  n  noli  t  hat  position,  even,  you 
must  e  mvict  of  perjury  four  others,  ( Ian  yon  do  it  without  this? 
Arc  you  prepared  to  find  from  t  he  evidence  t  hat  t  hese  four  men- 
select  either  four  you  please — that  these  four  men  are  perjured? 
Be  it  so;  then,  al  least,  yon  have  got  two  honest  men  left  stand- 
ing equally  with  the  two  upon  the  pari  of  the  prosecution;  now, 
wUlyou  give  credence  to  the  pro  ttor's  two  witnesses, and  not 
to  the  prisoner's?  Why?  Do  so;  if  you  think  it  right,  do  so.  But 
let  us  have  the  reason  why;  and  let  that  reason  satisfy  your  con- 
sciences that  it  is  what  i  3  meant  by  the  law  when  it  declares  I  bat 
the  probabilities  shall  be  given  in  favor  of  the  accused.  1 1  won't 
do  to  say  with  Dr.  Healy,  "nobody  ever  heard  of  this  self-defense 
until  your  came  into  the  court-house."  It  is  not  true;  il  is  false; 
as  .other  things  in  this  case  are  false.  The  public  newspapers  in 
Cumberland  proclaimed  the  fact  that  a  pistol  hud  been  found  in 
the  street;  but  it  was  not  known  to  whom  that  pistol  belonged. 

Mr.  WHITNEY.   Have  you  the  paper  to  refer  to? 

Mr.  Nelson.  I  think  I  have  (reaching  toward  the  table;)  here 
it  is.     Mr.  Nelson  then  read  from  the  paper,  the  testimony  b 
the  coroner's  jury,  as  to  the  finding  of  a  pistol  in  the  strict. 

All  1  adduce  this  for  is  that  I  may  b  s  abl  ■  to  denoun  ;e  I  he  si 
ment  which has  been  made,  and  maybe  again,  that  this  plea  of 
self-defense  is  a  gotten-up,  or  pretended  plea,  as  untrue.  The 
facts  of  this  case  are  the  foundation  of  this  defense,  and  we  have 
all  along  contemplated  showing  to  this  jury,  and  we  think- we 
have  done  so  successfully,  that  this  defense  is  a  good  one.  Why, 
gentlemen,  what  are  we  talking  about?  Suppose  Mclvaig  were 
on  trial  here  for  his  life  instead  of  Harry  Black,  what  evidence 
would  you  have  to  convicthim?  Six  men  seeing. him  with  a  pistol 
in  his  hand;  only  two  swearing  to  seeing  the  pistol  in  Black's 
hand?  Nay,  Dr.  llealydoes  not  even  swear  to  that,  but  expressly 
statesthat  hesawa  pistol  in  the  hand  of  neither.  Suppose  McKaig 
were  on  trial  here  for  his  life  for  the  murder  of  Black?  What 
stronger  case  could  you  have  against  him?  Why  they  would 
trace  him  from  his  home  over  the  bridge;  they  would  show  him 
crossing  the  street  at  an  unusual  place;  they  would  show  him 
changing  his  cane  from  his  right  to  his  left  hand;  they  would  show 
him  reaching  back  his  hand  as  if  for  a  pistol;  they  would  place 
him  upon  the  street;  they  would  show  the  encounter;  they  would 
find  a  pistol  on  the  street,  the  same  as  found  here;  they  would 
have  Six  witnesses  to  the  pistol  being  in  his  hand;  there  would  be 
a  case  as  six  to  two  stronger  against  William  \V.  McKaigthan  there 
is  against  the  young  prisoner  at  the  bar.  And  yet,  With  circum- 
stances that  would  work  this  result,  if  the  parties'  places  were 
changed,  you  are  asked  to  find  that,  beyond  a  doubt,  Harry  Black, 
with  malignity  and  depravity  of  heart,  slew  and  killed  William 
I 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.  W.    M  KAIG,    JR.  i  ■) 

W.  McKaig;  that  the  plea  of  self-defense  is  a  subterfuge  and  a 

fraud.  Are  you  satisfied  of  this  fact?  Is  this  the  reA]  conviction 
of  your  minds?  Lord  Chief  Baron  MacdOnald  says  that  "the 
jury  must  be  satisfied  that  there  is  no  rational  mode  of  account- 
ing for  the  circumstances,  but  upon  the  supposition  that  the  pris- 
oner is  guilty." 

And  Mr.  Baron  Alderson  said  in  another  case  with  more  com- 
plete exactness:  "To  enable  the  jury  to  bring  in  a  verdict  of 
guilty,  it  was  necessary,  hot  only  that  it  should  be  a  rational  con- 
viction, but  that  it  should  be  the  only  rational  Conviction  which 
those  circrtm stances  would  enable  them  to  draw.'' 

Gentlemen,  is  it  a  rational  convict  ion  that  McKaig  was  killed  by 
Black  maliciously  and  will  out  provocation  or  self-defense?  Esita 
rational  conviction  from  all  these  circumstances?  [f  so,  still  it  is 
not  sufficient.  In  the  language  of  Baron  Alderson:  "Not  only 
must  it  be  a  rational  conviction  from  all  the  circumstances,  but 
it  must  be  the  only  rational  conviction  that  the  mind  can  reach." 

Tell  me  that  the  only  rational  conviction  that  the  mind  can 
reach  from  these  circumstances  is  one  of  the  guilt  of  the  party 
when  the  circumstances  disclose,  upon  the  part  of  the  State  two 
witnesses  to  the  negative  fact  of  not  seeing  a  certain  thingand 
upon  the  part  of  the  defense  six  witnesses  to  an  affirmative  fact 
of  seeing  t  lie  same  thing? 

Now  let  me  <j;o  a  little  further.  Wills  on  Circumstantial  Evi- 
dence, page  175.  says:  "If  there  be  any  reasonable  dottbi  . 
the  reality  of  the  connection  of  the  circumstances  of  evidence, 
with  the  fact  to  be  proved,  or  as  to  i  he  complet  i  ness  of  t  he 
of  the  Gorpus  delicti,  Or  as  to  the  proper  conclusions  to  be  drawn 
from  the  evidence,  it  is  safer  to  err  in  acquitting  than  in  convict- 
ing, or  as  the  maxim  is  more  popularly  expressed,  'it  is  better  that 
ten  guilty  persons  should  escape  rather  than  one  innocent  man 
should  suffer.' ,-  This  rule  follows  irresistibly  as  a  deduction  from 
the  consideration  of  the  numerous  fallacies  necessarily  incidental 
to  the  formation  of  the  judgment,  on  indirect  evidence,  and  con- 
tingent probabilities,  and  from  the  impossibility  in  all  cases  of 
drawing  the  line  between  moral  certainty  and  doubt.  In  ques- 
tions of  civil  right  the  magistrate  is  obliged  to  decide  aci  ordirtg 

the  greatest   account  of  probability  in  favor  of  the  on 

other  <d'  the  litigant  parties;  but  where  life  or  liberfy  are  in  tic 
balance,  it  is  neither  just,  nor  necessary  that  the  accused  should 
be  convicted  or  punished,  but  upon  conclusive  evidence,  while  it 
is  certain  that  circumstantial  evidence  is  frequently  most  con- 
vincing and  satisfactory,  "and  this  is  circumstantial  evidence." 
it  must  never  be  forgotten,  as  was  remarked  by  that  wise  and 
upright  magistrate,  sir  Matthew  11  ale.  that  "  persons  really  in  no- 
may  be  entangled  under  such  presumptions  that  many  times 
carry  very  gre^tt probabilit  iesof  guilt,"  wherefore  as  he  remai  ks 
"tins  kind  of  evidence  must  be  very  warily  pressed." 

How  do  you  view  t  his  case?    These  humanejudges  tell  us  that 

we  should  he  very  caret  ill  how  I  his  test  iinoiiy  is  I  o  be  pressed, and 

yet  we  find  all  the  vigor  of  the  state  in  the  person  of  its  highest 
Legal  officer,  pressing  with  all  theweightof  his  personal  chi 
ter,  all  the  weight  of  lib  great  intellect;  we  find   the  attorney  for 


7(3  TRIAL   OF    HAKRY    CRAWFORD   BLACK 

uinty,  with  all  the  vigor  of  Lis  mind,  and  all  the  zeal  of  his 

:  we  find  t  he  private  prosecutor  urging  with  Still  more  vi 
this  \  imony  which  these  humane  judges  tell  us shoui 

very  -•  warily  pressed."    "Many  adverse  appearances  may ben 
weighed  by  a  single  favorable  one.  an  !  all  the  probability  s  of  thfi 

may  uol  be  before  the  jury.?'  Such  is  the  lawof  theland 
upon  the  subject  of  this  class  of  testimony,     [now  put   it   toyoi    \ 

emen,  whether  taking  the  evidence  just  as  it  is  on  tl  i  one 
subject  of  the  shooting,  whether  you  can,  as  rational  nun,  (anno 
to  the  conclusion  that  this  crime  was  committed  beyond  a  rational 
doubt.  That  it  is  not  only  the  conviction  deducible  from  i  lie  i  ir- 
cumstances,  but  that  it  is  only  conviction  which  a  reasoi 
mind  can  reach.  Let  me  ask:  arc  all  the  probabilities  of  the  i 
■i    [s  there  nothing  suppressed?    No  cireumstai 

back  by  the  State  capable  of  giving  the  jury  lighl  upon  this 
important  subject?    Now,  hear  with  me  one  moment,  and 
let  us  see  if  that  he  so.     Answer  me,  gentlemen,  why,  in  all  fair- 
ness,   why,  in  justice  to  the  young  life  that  is  now  in  \< 

in  justice  to  the  State  to  which  the  life  of  every  citizen  is  (her. 
were  not  all  the  State's  witnesses  placed  upon  the  stand  to  tell 
you  not  part;  but;  the  whole  truth?  Were  the  counsel  afraid  that 
something  might  drop  from  those  witnesses  unfavorable  to jthe 

:  of  the  prosecution?  They  summoned  these  witnesses— why 
were  they  not  examined? 

State,  as  [  have  said,  is  chary  of  the  lives  of  hex  citizens. 
It  is  a  false  theory  that  the  State  is  any  more  the  prosecu- 
tor   of     her    people    than     their    defender.      In    the    morals    of 

;s,    in   the-  Very  theory    of  our    free    government    she    in- 
structs her  ministers  to  give  the  prisoner  the  benefit  of  all 
evidence.    Hence,  I  say  that  all  who  witnessed  this  transa< 
should  have  been  placed  on  the  stand.     Was  it  done?    of  all  the 
multitude  of  people  who  were  preseni  upon  that  fatal  occasion 

■  were  Offered  to  you  'mi!  two  in  chief.  Can  it  he  said,  then, 
that  all  the  probabilities  of  the  case  were  before  the  jury?  Why 
v  as  the  fact  that  McKaig  had  a  pistol  at  all  is  studiously  con- 

:  by  the  prosecution  until  forced  out  by  the  eross-examina- 

of  l  he  defense?  Was  it.  not  a  suppression  of  the  material 
fact  which  the  j  iry  ought  to  know?  ts  this  the  fair  investigation 
that  the  prisoner  is  entitled  to,  and  that  an  honorable  and  just- 
minded  jury  will  insist  upon  having  before  they  will  consent  to 
lay  thai  hetid  upon  the  block 'and  chop  it  off  wit!)  t  lie  axe  of  the 
law?  There  have  been  suppressions  of  material  evidence  all 
through  the  case.  There  has  been  much  said  about  McKaig's 
pistols.  How  many  had  he  V  One,  two,  or  three':'  When  the 
prisoner  is  charged  with  killing  a  man  in  the  peace*.of  fcli 
ought  not  the  jury  to  know  if  the  charge  he  t  rue,  or   whether  the 

who  was  killed  was  not  rather  a  walking  bat&ery?  IDoyon 
observe  but  one  thing,  gentlemen  of  the  jury,  one  pistol  was  found 
on  the' body  of  McKaig;  one  was  picked  up  by  Turney,  near  the 
curb,  and  one  was  found  near  where  thi  body  fell,  and  was  picked 
up  by  a  man  other  than  Turney.  Now,  the  prosecution  must 
know  the  true  history  of  these  pistols.  They  seek  to  impress  the 
jury  with  the  belief  that  the  pistol  picked  up  by  Turney,  and  tb.f 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    M  KAIG,    JR.  ',  < 

one  picked  up  by  the  other  man  near  the  body  were  one  and  the 
same.  Would  not  Tunieysettle  tins  question?  And  yet  while 
lie  has  been  here  all  this  time  upon  their  summons,  they  close 
their  ease — in  chief  and  in  rebuttal— and  refuse  t<>  call  him. 
What,  faith  can  yon  have  in  a  prosecution  which  acts  thus?  Why 
produce  a  witness  to  swear  that  he  saw  Turney  pick  up  I 

near  the  b  dv?    Might  not.  this  witness  be  mistaken?    But  Tur- 
ner, the  man  whom  they  say  picked  up  this  pistol,  could  not  be 
mistaken.    Why  did  they  not  call  him?    The  nervous  ojd  gentle- 
man, Dr.  Smith,  saw  the  bell  unbuckled  by  Mervin  McKaig.    Do 
you  recollect  that,  he  was  brought  here  to  contradict  Charles  Me- 
dore ou  that  subject.    Now,  mind,  gentlemen,  here  is  an  old  man 
whose  mind  is  a,  perfect  chaos  of  bewilderment,  who  was  flutter- 
ing like  a  wounded  bint  amidst  the  excitement.    lie  is  brought 
here  to  prove  what?    That  Charles  Medore  swore  to  a 
when  he  testified   to  the  unbuttoning  of  this  pistol  belt  by  him- 
self.   Why,  Charles  Medore  is  just  as  honest  as  Dr.  Smith.     Upon 
what  meat  hath  this  ourCaesar  Eed,  I  hat  he  is  brought  here  to  put 
the  stain  of  perjury  upon  an  honest  mechanic.     No.  sir!    Why 
bringDr.  Smithatall,  if  Mr.Medprewastobe  contradict,  d?  Where 
is  Mervin  McKaig?    lie  has  an  interest  in  this  matter.    I 
herepromptingthisprosecui  ion  day  in  and  day  out.     Here  he  has 
sat  ready  at  any  moment  to  contradict  Medore  if  the  f. 
Dr.  Smith  supposes.    Instead  of  him,  however,  this  flutterin 
bird,  with  Ids   nerves  unstrung,  is  brought    here   to  su 
tact;  when   the  young,  vigorous  manhood  of  Mervin  Mel 
the  very  man  who,  according  to  Dr.  Smith,  unbuckled 
left  without  his  face  being  shown  to  this  jury.     There,  is  a  re 
for  it.     It  is  the  suppression  of  troth.    A  suppression  of  the 
truth  for  the  purpose  of  taking  human  life.     I  do  deprecate;  I  de- 
nounce it;  and  so  do  the  law  hooks,  as    I  will  take  occasion  to 
show  to  \ou,  gentlemen.     "In  the  endeavor  to  discover  trutl 

mce  should  be  excluded."  1  read  from  the  great  authority 
on  this  subject.  Wills  on  Circumstantial  Evidence,  "in  the  en- 
deavor to  discover  truth,  no  evidence  should  be  excluded,"  and 
yet  we  have  the  evidence  of  Turney  excluded.  We  have  the  evi- 
dence of  the  pistol  excluded.  We  have  the  ev  of  Mervin 
tig  excluded. 

It  is  a  maxim  of  the  law  "that  all  things  arc1  presumed  against 
the  destroyer  of  evidence, "  and  thesijp]  resion  or  destruction  of 
pertinent  i  is  always  therefore  deemed  a  prejudicial  cir- 

cumstance ot  greatweight.  The  destruction  or  the  suppres 
of  evidence  is  always  considered  a  circumstance  of  great  we 
Do  you  mark  that  ?  And  yet,  with  this!  uni 
tins' wind"  t  ransacl  ion,  with  the  suppression  of  these  three  f; 
winch  were  well  calculated  to  throwsome  light  tipon  the  me]  i 
the  case  to  the  jury  in  reference  to  this  matter;  with  all  this  you 
are  asked  to  saj  that  the  conviction  is  sovstron;  ;  that  it  is 

theonlyco  i  that  a  reasonable  minn  can  draw.    Is  this  all? 

Xo!  gentlemen  of  the  jury,  there  is  another  suppresion  of 
deuce.'  This  case  is  Cull  of  qiiipsand  quirks.    It  IS  lull  of  turnings 
and  shirtings  suggested  by  the  paid  ingenuity  of  counsel.    V, 
are  the  pantaloons  of  this  dying  many    II  is  coal  was  exhibited 
here  to  parade  the  holes  made  by  the  bulled.     Wherean 


7b  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

pantaloons?  Would  they,  too,  tend  to  supply  a  link  in  this  chain 
of  testimony  favorable  to  the  prisoner?  I  ask  you,  gentlem<  n,  is 
sapistol  holster  in  those  pants?  is  there  a  Docket  here 
where  a  pistol  might  be  carried  as  welJ  as  in  the  holster?  What 
is  the  condition  of  that  pocket?  Is  it  sonnd  or  torn?  Docs  it 
give  evidence  of  a  pistol  having  been  drawn  from  it?  or  of  some 
force  having  been  exerted  uponit?  The  pantaloons  would  have 
answered  all  thest  questions,  and  without  reason— without  any 
3e  for  their  suppression — they  have  been  suppressed  and  we  are 
left  to  conjecture  where  they  might  have  supplied  facts.  Am  I 
nor  right  that  this  is  not  a  prosecution  of  a  character  to  commend 
itself  to  your  confidence.  Is  there  not  a  suppression  of  the  truth? 
Are  all  t  he  probabilities  of  the  case  before  the  jurj  ?  Arc  not  the 
probabilities  that  arc  before  the  jury  all  in  favor  of  the  prisoner? 
Is  there  no  doubt  to  satisfy  a  reasonable  mind. 

Now,  let  me  come  to  another  branch  of  this  case.  I  beg  you 
willnot  be  wearied  with  me.  for  the  obligation  of  duty  is  such 
that  while  I  regret  to  weary.  I  cannot  forget  thediseharge  of  that 
duty.  Let  us  come  then  to  another  branch.  Do  you  know,  gen- 
tlemen, that  before  you  can  convict  a  man  of >  willful  and  mali- 
cious murder,  that  you  must  show  a  motive  for  the  killing? 
There  must  lie  a  motive,  a  rational  motive.  There  must  be  a, 
mot  ive  commensurate  with  the  act  done.  Now,  that  question  of 
motive  lias  so  far  heen  entirely  kept  out  of  view  here,  as  I  will 
show  you  in  the  very  few  remarks  upon  the  subject  that  I  propose 
to  submit. 

In  the  same  book  to  which  I  have  referred  I  read  this: 

"As  an  action  without  a  motive  would  he  an  effect  without  a 
cause,  an  !  as  the  particulars  of  external  situation  and  conduct 
will  in  general  correctly  denote  the  motive  tor  a,  criminal  action, 
the  absence  of  all  evidence  of  an  inducing  cause  is  reasonably  re- 
garded, where  the  fact  is  doubtful,  as  affording  a  strong  presump- 
tion of  innocence." 

Now,  wha1  was  the  motive  for  this  supposed  murder?  The 
learned  attorney  general  says  that  it  was  not  self-defense.  Let  us 
put,  that  aside.  lie  says  that  it  was  not  frenzy  of  this  boy's  mind 
occasioned  by  the  intelligence  of  his  sister's  seduction.  Let  us  put 
that  aside.  Then,  what  was  it?  Is  there  any  unkindly  disposition 
shown  by  young  Black  toward  McKaig?  Norn-.  Has  there  ever 
been  a  sb.igle  threat?  Not  one.  What,  then,  I  repeat,  was  the 
motive?  When;  is  the  cause  for  this  effect?  The  attorney  gene- 
ral gives  one.  Now,  let  us  see.  With  all  his  knowledge  of  human 
ire,  with  all  his  astuteness  of  argument,  with  all  his  profun- 
dity of  legal  knowledge,  he  has  from  the  depths  of  this  case  brought 
to  light  but  one  motive.  It  is  fair  to  suppose,  therefore,  that  this 
is  the  leal  motive  which  will  be  insisted  on  in  this  prosecution. 
What  is  this  motive?  I  adverted  to  it  a  moment  ago  casually. 
The  single  motive — now,  mind  you,  he  has  discarded  the  frenzy  of 
the  mind  and  self-defense.  He  has  shown  nothing  looking  toward 
personal  revenge ;  no  threat;  no  unkind  or  hostile  feeling.  The 
single  motive  is  this  :  That  young  Black  killed  young  McKaig  to 
prevent  him  being  a  witness  to  break  down  the  testimony  of  his 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    m'kAIG,    JR.  79 

sister  in  the  case  against  the  father;  that  for  the  purpose  of  get- 
ting him  out  of  the  way  he  slew  him.  Only  this  and  nothing  more. 
Now,  will  you  pardon  me  if  I  go  over  the  line  of  argument  I  as- 
sumed a  moment  ago,  to  show  you  that  before  yon  can  get  at  that 
mot  i\  e  you  must  find  the  fact — not  the  inference,  but  the  fact  thai 
young  Black  knewtfiat  his  sister  was  tacome  back  for  thai  purpose; 
not  the  inference,  I  repeat,  upon  the  authority  of  the  law  books — 
^'nothing  must  1  e  inferred  because,  if  true,  it  would  account  for 
the  facts1' — but  the  sworn,  proved  fact  itself.  Mow,  this  very 
fact  was  ruled  out  by  the  Court  when  the  prosecution  sought  to 
put  it  in.  What,  then,  becomes  of  this  motive?  But,  perhaps,  you 
will  hear  the  learned  counsel  as  you  heard  them  in  their  opening 
suggestions  on  this  case,  declaring  "  we  have  proved  the  killing, 
and  we  will  rest  upon  the  presumptions  of  the  law.  The  killing 
proved,  the  presumption  of  malice  follows  from  that  killing." 
This  line,  you  will  observe,  is  an  abandonment  of  the  astute  mo- 
tive of  the  attorney  general.  No  matter,  let  us  test  this  ni  n-  motive. 
The  new  motive,  then,  is  that  of  a  depraved  and  malignant  heart, 
based  upon  the  presumptions  of  the  law. 

Now,  gentlemen,  a  presumption  can  never  be  used  in  any  case  ' 
save  and  except  for  the  purpose  of  supplying  the  want  of  a  fact, 
for  if  the  fact  is  there  then  there  is  no  place  for  presumption.  You 
must  presume  that  the  prisoner  at  the  bar  is  of  a  depraved  and 
malignant  disposition, and  that  from  that  depravity  and  from  that 
malignity  has  followed  the  death  of  his  victim.  Is  this  true? 
Mind  you,  presumpt  ion  is  always  capable  of  being  rebutted  in  law. 
Is  this  true?  Is  Black  of  a  depraved  and  malignant  heart?  Does 
not  the  whole  course  of  t  his  case  rebut  such  presumpt  ion?  Take 
him,  gentlemen,  from  his  first  infancy;  take  him  at  his  mother's 
knee,  a  prattling  babe;  from  there  go  wit!)  him  through  the  com- 
munity as  a  boy;  scan  his  character;  see  if  you  can  find  any  of 
the  traits  that  were  attributed  to  Julian  the  Apostate — cruelty  to 
the  smaller  animals  of  creation;  the  spiteful  disposition  toward 
his  fellow  mortals,  and  the  malignity  that  would  cause  him  to 
Commit  wrongs  against  his  schoolmates.  None  at  all.  Go  with 
him  from  his  home  into  the  army  of  the  Confederate  States; 
fighting,  as  he  supposed,  for  a,  just  cause.  Whatdo  you  find  t  here? 
Charles  Taylor  tells  you  that  he  was  well  spoken  of  everywhere; 
that  he  maintained  a  good  character,  and  good  characters  are  the 
exception  in  the  ranks  of  all  armies.  Go  with  him  after  the  close 
of  the  struggle  for  the  lost  cause  back  again  with  him  to  his 
mother's  home,  and  see  him  sharing  there  with  her  the  pittance  of 
his  daily  earnings.  Where  find  you  the  malignity  of  his  heart? 
Is  he  not,  kind  to  his  father?  Is  not,  he  a  doting  son,  supporting, 
to  the  best  of  his  ability,  an  impoverished  mother?  Is  not,  he  a 
fond  brother  to  an  only  sister?  Is  he  not  kind  1 0  all  who  conic 
within  his  range  in  thai  community?  Yet  you  are  to  find  that  he 
was  of  a  depraved  and  malignant  heart,  follow  him  away  from 
home  again— put  upon  the  broad  prairies  of  the  west,  bind  him 
seated  at  the  desk  of  t  he  accountant  in  the  office  of  the  honorable 
Mr.  (Mr.  one  year  be  was  with  him.  Bid  he  testify  to  any  de- 
pravity; any  badness  of  heart  ?  No.  But  Mr.  Orr  comes  here  vol- 
untarily to  give  his  tribute  to  the  prisoner  at  the  bar  of  good  gen 


'  TRIAL   OF   HARRY   C; 

I ha1  he  was  with  him  in  \h^ 
land  of  strangers.  Trace  bira  still  fuifther,  even  out  upon  the 
borders  of  the  west,  in  the  city  of  s  hnaha,  from  the  to  the 

E  onr  civilization;  go  wil  h  liim  down  into  the  b 

i  rude  i  tine     of  A  lleghany.  was  l>e  not  be- 
Behold  the  women  and  children  even  now  offering 
up  prayers  for  his  return  to  them.     Everywhei 
,  and  i  hal  a  voice  of  commendal 

i: y  of  Lis  :  ,  the  kindness  an  of  hi 3  di 

tion.     Where,  then,  gei  .  do  you  find   that  depi 

malignant  heart  which  now  forms  the  only  motive  for  crime  relied 
uiion  by  the  State?    A.nd  without  that,  uo other mol  ive  appea 
you  cannot  convict  in  t  his  cause. 

We  hav  through  all  these  stages  of  his  career1. 

T'i  the  place  of  hatred  we  find  love;  in  the  place  of  drunken 

:  in  the  place  of  .'  srocity,  gentleness;  in  the  place  of  moan- 
y;  in  the  place  of  malignancy  and  depravity,  a  life 
tied  with  every  virtue  1  hat  can  adorn  t  tie  character  of  a  spot- 
youth.    Oh,  virtue, thou  art  indeed  sublime  if  this  be  thy  op- 
■!    How  is  if'?    We  are  now  testing  this  proposition  of  a 
malignant  and  depravi  d  heart  in  order  to  discover  who  in  all  prob- 
ability was  the  aggressor  in  this  matter.     Lei   us  test  the  other 
in  this  tragedy  by  the  same  rule  by  which  we  '  id  1  he 

e  bar.    We  have  seen  who  is  Harry  Crawford  Bl 
let  us  inquire  who  was  W.  W.  McKaig.    He  was  the  scion  of  an 
honorable,  wealthy  house  ;  :  If  a   young  man  of  magnifii 

physique — handsome,  intelligent,  and  ;  i  of  all  those  fatal 

accomplishments  that  wrought  his  ruin.     Was  henol  :;  cal- 

culated to  sel  on  fire  the  female  heart.  As  lie  enters  the  humble 
dwelling  of  this  unfortunate  family,  an  honored  and  it  welcome 
.  conciliating  their  good  will,  and  day  after  day.  perhaps 
er  night,  insinuating  himself  into  1  he  affect  ions  of  her  who 
was  the  jewel  of  the.  household.  1^  it  any  wonder  that  he  wen  her 
love?     !  le,  so  kind,  so  attentive;  he  smiledupon  her, 

audi'  ir  smile  again  as  though  it  were  the  very  sunlight 

of  his  lite. 

Mr.  Bren  '•,  ;.    [f  your  honor  please.  T  desire  to  interrupt  the 
gentleman.     I  must  object  to  his  arguing  before  the  jury  what  is 
not  in  evidence  ia  i  lie  cause.   The  gentlemen  proceeds  in  this  way: 
,  he  d  i  the  character  of  the  traverser,  then  he  goes  on 

to  say,  "Let  us  now  turn  to  thecharacter  of  W.  W.  McKaig?  Who 
was  he?    Handsome,  and  possessed  ot  all  these  fatal  accomplish- 
1  s  that  wo  ild  he  apt  to  take  possession  of  a  young  girl's  hearl ; 
I  welcome  visitor  at  the  hou.se  of  her  family,  a 'el  dis- 
stdevotion."    We  submit  that  that  is  not  testi- 
ni  mi;,  in  th  j  case  at  all.     In  the  first  place,  that  there  is  not  a  par- 
of  proof  that  has  be<  I  showing  that  McKaig  visited 

this  girl's  house,  or  that  he  was  |  (fatal  accom- 

plishments that,  have  been  spoken  Of. 
Mr.  Nelson.  1  have  a,  right  to  argue  that  as  far  as  the  question 
.1  iction  is  concerned.    It  was  a  fact,  so  far  as  belief  therein, 
impressed  itself  on  the  mind  of  the  prisoner.     We  could  nol  | 
into  the  truth   or  the   untruth  of  the   fact  of  seduction,  bill 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    WL.    M7KAIG,   JR.  81 

were  allowed  by  the  Court  to  show  that  it  was  a  fact  to  him,  and 
so  communicated;  and  that  from  a  belief  in  such  fact  certain  things 
resulted. 

Mr.  Whitney.  But  the  gentlemen  has  not  confined  himself  to 
that. 

Mr.  Nelson.  Will  the  gentleman  please  lay  out  a  line  of  argu- 
ment for  me. 

The  Cotjut.  An  objection  is  made,  and  the  question  submitted 
to  the  Court.  Whenever  a  question  is  presented  to  the  Court,  it 
is  presented  as  a  question  of  law,  and  of  course  it  must  be  deter- 
mined. 

Mr.  Whitney.  I  have  made  no  objection,  and  neither  did  I  in- 
tend to  makeany  through  the  course  of  the  argument.  The  State's 
attorney,  however,  has  made  an  objection,  and  the  objection  goes 
to  the  point  that  he  is  speaking  upon  what  there  is  no  evidence 
whatever  in  the  cause  to  sustain. 

Now,  if  the  gentleman  who  desires  to  speak  upon  the  effect  the 
communication  would  make  upon  the  mind  of  the  prisoner,  that 
is  another  question;  but  when  he  states  to  this  jury  that  if  they 
had  been  allowed  they  wouhhhave  done  so  and  so,  and  would  have 
proved  so  and  so,  it  is  not  proper.  He  is  going  on  to  state  that  he 
visited  this  house,  when  there  is  not  a  particle  of  testimony  in  ref- 
erence to  tli at  point.  My  brother  Brengle  has  made  the  objection 
to  the  Court,  and  we  insist  upon  that  objection. 

Mr.  Nelson.  Are  we  allowed  to  draw  no  inferences  from  the 
testimony,  or  are  we  bound  to  take  up  these  notes  and  read  this 
fact  and  that  fact,  and  say  at  every  step  that  it  is  a  fact?  Is  the 
prosecution  to  lay  out  our  line  of  argument?  Have  they  not  suffi- 
ciently succeeded  in  the  object  of  their  interruption,  and  may  I  not 
goon? 

The  COURT.  Gentlemen,  the  Court  does  not  think  that  upon  the 
question  now  presented  it  can  properly  do  more  than  say  this: 
That  we  have  decided  that  the  fact  of  seduction  as  a  fact  has  been 
excluded;  that  is  to  say,  that  testimony  to  prove  the  fact,  that  the 
fact  was  a  fact,  lias  been  excluded.  Of  course,  in  that  exclusion 
was  involved  of  necessity  the  exclusion  of  testimony  to  prove  that 
it  was  not  a  fact.  A  refusal  of  testimony  on  the  one  side  of  the 
question  of  necessity  involves  the  exclusion  of  testimony  on 
another  side  of  the  question.  The  Court  thought  their  ruling  was 
perfectly  understood. 

Now,  "as  to  the  next  item.  The  Court  decides  that  the  xubjectot 
seduction,  if  that  can  be  understood  as  distinguishing  it  from  the 
fact  of  seduction,  that  the  subject  of  seduction  only  entered  into 
I  he  case  to  the  extent  of  which  it  might  be  si i own  by  the  evidence 
that  it  entered  into  and  opes  ited  on  the  mind  of  the  prisoner;  that 
is  the,  clear  ruling  of  the  Court  now. 

Of  course,  argument  ought  to  be  confined  to  the  evidence.  Don't 
let  us  be  misunderstood  by  this  statement  as  being  anything  else 
than  announcing  the  general  proposition.  That  is  all  the  Court 
can  say.    Arguments  on  both  sides  ought  to  be  confined  to  the 

law  and  tin;  evidence  in  the  cause;  and  such  deductions  from  the 
evidence  in,  pertaining  to  the  issue  involved  as  a  matter  of  law, 
such  deductions  as  are  reasonably  deducihle  from  that  evidence. 


82  TRIAL    OF    ITARRY   CRAWFORD    BLACK 

Any  deduction  to  establish  the  particular  view  which  the  counsel 

may  entertain,  provided  that  view  pertain  to  the  issue  in  the 
cause  as  announced  by  the  Court. 

Mr.  Nelson.  I  suppose,  sir,  that  the  objecl  of  the  prosecution 
has  been  accomplished,  which  was,  as  I  take  it.  to  interrupl 
thread  of  my  remark.     If  that  is  of  any  advantage  to  them,  gen- 
tlemen of  the  .i'n'y,  why  they  are  entitled  to  ir.  as  they  are  to  all 
the  other  matters  that  arc  i in-own  into  this  case. 

I  was  making  a,  line  of  remark  that  I  regard  as  legitimate.  I  do 
not  now  understand  the  Court,  to  say  it  was  not  a.  legitimate  line 
of  argument.  I  hold  in  my  had  a  document  thai  might  well  have 
impressed  upon  any  man's  mind  certain  convictions.  T  was  endeav- 
oring to  show  you,  if  not  in  the  gradgrind  manner  in  which  the 
gentleman  does  things,  yet  in  my  own  feeble  manner  the  thoughts 
that  must  have  coursed  through  the  brain  of  this  young  man,  and 
that  frenzied  him,  and  resulted  in  the  commission  of  tins  deed. 
This  letter  shows  the  depraved  heart. 

[Mr.  Nelson  then  read  the  letter,  which  appears  in  preceding 
pages  of  evidence.] 

This  letter,  I  say,  shows  the  life-tie  of  intercourse  between  this 
man  and  this  woman.  It  shows  this.  Read  it  for  yourselves.  I 
was  showing  how  the  man  who  could  write  this  let!  er  could  win  the 
love  of  this  woman;  that  in  his  approaches  there  was  nothing  bold, 
nothing  forward;  oh,  no!  your  genuine  seducer  is  never  this.  He 
glides  toward  his  prey;  and,  like  the  fabled  serpent,  charms  into 
false  security  his  poor,  trembling  victim.  I  say  tins  letter  shows 
that  it  was  too  late  now  for  her  to  escape;  he  bad  won  her  all  to 
himself;  she  was  all  his,  heart  and  soul,  mind  and  body;  he  bad 
Wound  the  delicate  tendrilsof  her  heart  about  him,  and  they  clung 
to  him  as  the  ivy  clings  to  the  oak.  I  say  this  letter  shows  ail 
this.  She  had  forgotten  all  else  in  the  world,  all  except  him.  He 
was  the  soul  of  her  existence.  Father,  mother,  brother,  and  home, 
all  forgotten!  Yes,  and  on  whom  had  she  bestowed  all  this  affec- 
tion? On  one  who  was  to  use  her  for  a  moment  for  the  gratification 
of  his  lusts,  and  then  to  fling  her  aside  like  a  worthless  garment. 
But,  perhaps,  he  would  marry  her?  What!  William  W.  McKaig 
marry  a  prostitute?  But  he  bad  made  her  what  she  was!  True, 
but  are  not  some  men's  wives  and  daughters  made  to  feed  the  lust 
of  such  as  he?  Oh,  shame!  Call  him  from  his  grave;  seat  him 
by  the  side  of  the  prisoner  at  the  bar,  tear  open  their  bosoms,  and 
expose  their  hearts  to  tins  jury,  and  tell  me  upon  "which  is  written 
depravity  and  malignity?  Yea,  by  that  test  we  will  stand  or  fall; 
go  free  or  be  hanged.  With  those  two  hearts  thus  exposed  before 
you,  tell  me,  then,  in  which  heart  do  you  hud  malignity,  in  which 
do  you  find  depravity? 

That  is  not  all  this  letter  discloses;  that  is  not  all  the  record  of 
the  heart  that  has  gone,  that  this  letter  exposes.  It  shows  a  crim- 
inal intimacy  that  had  been  going  on  for  along  time.  It  shoiws 
that  the  writer  of  it  was  not  afraid  to  use  language  of  any  kind  to 
the  woman  he  had  wronged,  but  who  loved  him.  He  knew  that  a 
woman  who  loves,  though  wronged,  is — 

Like  a  waxen  image  'gainst  a  fire. 
Bears  no  impression  oi  the  thing  she  was. 


FOB    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    m'kAIO,    JR.  83 

The  prisoner  at  the  bar  had  a  right  to  road  this  letter  in  that 
light,  and  if  hebea  man,  as  he  is,  if  he  be  what  he  is  represented  in 
this  case  to  be  by  t  he  evidence,  his  heart  must  have  burned,  burned 
even  to  eon  sumption,  when  he  saw  and  appreciated  what  that  let- 
ter itself  suggests  to  any  mind.  And  is  the  burning  shame',  the 
fierce  phrenzy  that  must  have  overwhelmed  and  crazed  his  heart 
and  brain,  to  be  nick-named  malignity  and  depravity? 

But  to  return.  Not  only  does  this  letter  show  the  depravity  of 
the  writer  in  this  criminal  intimacy,  but  if  shows  that  which  is 
more  damning  still.  Tt  shows  that  the  man  who  stood  before 
God\s  altar,  and  pledged  his  troth  to  a  virtuous  woman,  was  will- 
ing to  pollute  her  bed  by  the  presence  of  a. prostitute.  Directions 
are  .-riven  in  that  letter  how  to  get  in  and  out;  how  to  loop  the 
dress:  how  to  conceal  herself  from  the  world  while  she  played  the 
harlot  in  his  wife's  bed-chamber.  1  say  here  is  the  evidence  of  the 
malignity  which  is  sought  to  be  fastened  upon  the  young  prisoni  r 
at  the  bar.  It  is  said  the,  letter  is  not  his.  Whoever  says  so 
charges  General  Kesley  with  that  which  is  not  true,  for  General 
Resley  says  that  it  was  and  is  his  letter  in  his  own  proper  hand- 
writing-. The  attorney  general  tells  yon  that  no  woman  would 
have  received  snch  a,  letter  without  spurning  the  writer;  that  it  is 
a  forgery  of  the  defense.  This  view  may  do  credit  to  the  purity 
of  heart  of  the  learned  gentleman,  but  it  is  not  complimentary  to 
his  knowledge  of  woman's  heart. 

Knowesf  thou  not  yet,  when  love  in  varies  the  soul. 
That  all  her  faculties  receive  his  chains  ; 
Thai  reason  gives  Iter  sceptre  to  his  hand. 
Or  only  struggles  to  he  more  enslaved? 

The  gentleman  says  that  its  intrinsic  evidence  shows  that  it  was 
written,  not  by  the  cultivated  gentleman  who  .ornamented  society, 
Imt  by  a  person  of  low,  vulgar  habits  and  tastes.  Yon  know  why 
its  intrinsic  evidences  are  not  those  belonging  to  a  highly  culti- 
vated gentleman.  Why,  it  tells  you  itself.  I  told  yon,  gentlemen, 
and  I  repeat  it,  that  it  gives  me  no  pleasure  to  say  these  harsh 
things  in  the  presence  of  the  friends  of  this  dead  man.  On  my 
honor  it  does  not,  but  the  necessities  of  this  case  require  that  it 
shall  be  gone  through,  bleed  whose  heart  may  bleed.  It  shows 
Why  it  contains  inaccuracies  in  spelling;  why  it  contains  expres- 
sions that  otherwise,  might  not  come  from  bis  lips — he  was  drunk! 
He  says  so.  The  letter  discloses  the  fact  that  he  had  been  down 
town  in  u  debauch,  that  he  was  at  the  gambling  table,  and  that 
he  continued  drinking  liquor  until  he  got  too  much.  The  letter 
itself  says  so,  and  if  the  letter  says  so,  who  may  gainsay  the  fact? 
How  otherwise  do  you  account  for  the  postscript?  "If  you  can 
read  t  his  yon  can  do  more  t  ban  L  can." 

Now, gentlemen  of  the  jury,  you  have  my  views  upon  this  branch 
of  the  case.  The  prosecution  require  yon,  under  the  law,  to  con- 
vict Crawford  Black  of  the  murder  of  MeKaig  upon  the  presump- 
tion of  a  malicious  motive,  and  that  presumption  rests  upon  the 
theory  that  he,  is  of  depraved  and  malignant  disposition.  1  have 
shown  you  that  it  is  doubtful  which  of  these  young  men  began  t  lie 
assault  which  tern. mated  in  death.      I  have  'shown   you  that  the 

probabilities  of  the  question  are  as  six  to  one  in  favor  of  Black. 


84  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

If  neither  of  these  reasons  be  sufficient  to  warrant  you  in  your 
judgment  in  a  verdict  of  acquittal,  then  I  rest  his  life  upon  bis 
character  as  contrasted  with  that  of  McKaig.    Look  upon  the  two, 

and  then  say  by  your  verdict  which  was  the  more  likely  to  com- 
mit murder,  which  life  exhales  the  sweeter  perfume? 

I  have  thus  far,  gentlemen,  with  some  degree  of  warmth,  and 
with  much  feeling,  but  I  trust  without  bitterness,  endeavored  to 
impress  upon  you  this  one,  but,  in  my  judgment,  important  view 
of  this  case.  As  you  have  observed,  [have  not  stopped  to  seize 
this  piece  of  evidence  and  that  piece  of  evidence.  \  have  not 
stopped  to  trace  young  Black  to  see  whether  he  was  hunt  ins'  young 
McKaig.  The  testimony  on  this  point  is  of  that  flimsy  light  char- 
acter that  really  I  have  not  given  it  a  passing  thought.  We  have 
shown  you  that  he  went  his  usual  way  with  one  single  purpose. 
He  was  an  inveterate  cigar  smoker. 

I  suppose  I  will  be  here  interrupted  for  the  proof  that  some  wit- 
ness said  that  he  was  an  inveterate  cigar  smoker.  I  await  to  see 
whether  I  am  to  be  subjected  to  such  interruption. 

lie  was  scarcely  seen  anywhere  that  he  was  not  smoking.  The 
only  deviation  from  his  course  on  this  morning  was  to  go  down  by 
way  of  Washington  street,  a  short  distance  out  of  his  way,  to  pro- 
cure a  cigar.  He  returned  by  the  alley  which  led  him  to  Centre 
street.  Upon  Centre  street  was  the  office  of  Mr.  McKaig,  and  as 
he  passed  that  office  he  looked  in  the  window  with  the  casual 
glance  of  a  passer  by.  Upon  that  evidence  you  are  to  base  what? 
The  fact  that  he  was  hunting  for  McKaig.  This  fact  'must  be 
proved  equally  with  the  main  fact  beyond  a  reasonable  doubt,  and 
you  are,  therefore,  asked  that  when  be  cast  his  eye  towards  that 
office  of  McKaig's  that  he  was  the  creeping  assassin,  hunting  for 
his  victim.  We  have  shown  you  that  he  came  up  that  street,  and 
that  it  was  the  nearest  way  to  reach  Mr.  Shriver's  store,  to  which 
he  went. 

Now,  all  this  testimony  about  standing  upon  this  corner,  and 
standing  upon  that  corner,  depends  upon  a  man's  appreciation  of 
passing  time,  for  his  being  in  one  place  or  another  is  only  import- 
ant as  it  has  reference  to  time.  If  a  man  were  to  ask  me  now 
how  long  I  had  been  talking  to  you,  based  upon  any  knowledge  of 
the  time  passing  in  my  own  miniK  1  would  not  have  the  faintest 
conception.  Five  minutes,  ten  nrinutqp^  twentygminutes.  Upon 
live  minutes,  ten  minutes,  or  twenty  minutes  may  hang  the  life 
of  an  individual  ;  and  yet,  gentlemen  of  the  jury,  when  you  come 
to  speak  of  some  past  event  depending  upon  an  inconsiderable 
point  of  time,  which  of  you  would  risk,  not  a  life,  as  m  this  case, 
but  even  a  moderate  wager?  And  yet  you  are  to  take  these 
corner  pieces  of  evidences,  all  based  upon  some  supposed  half 
hour,  twenty  minutes,  ten  minutes,  or  live  minutes  as  solid  evi- 
dence upon  which  to  hang  a  man. 

Again,  gentlemen,  glance  a  moment  at  another  piece  of  evidence 
of  the  same  airy  character.  There  was  an  offer  here,  with  great 
parade,  of  an  overcoat,  an  immense  overcoat,  which  Harry  Black 
wore  on  the  fatal  morning,  which  was  to  conceal  the  pistol  of  the 
assassin.  He  was  described  with  his  hands  in  Ids  pockets.  He 
was   brought  to  speak  with  a  man,  and  would  you   believe  it— 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    m'kAIO,    JR.  85 

greeted  him  with  his  left  hand.  Of  course,  his  right  hand  was 
concealing  the  pistol.  Now  this  coat  is  not  immense  at  all,  but 
a  very  lignt  summer  overcoat.  Its  pockets  are  not  deeper  than 
mine.  The  pistol  you  saw  presented  before  you  was  a  pistol  of 
great  length,  one  of  the  largest  sized  revolvers.  Tt  was  put,  in 
evidence  that  the  weather  was  warm,  pleasant,  mild,  therefore  it 
was  notnecessary  for  him  to  wear  an  overcoat.  But  you  see  the  sim- 
ple production  of  the  coat  by  us  scatters  all  these  inferences  to 
the  winds.  If  the  State,  then,  is  driven  to  these  necessities,  and 
we  break  down  this  kind  of  evidence  so  easily,  we  ask  you  to  ex- 
amine with  scrutinizing  glance  all  the  other  pieces  of  evidence 
that  are  brought  in  of  this  confirmatory  character  and  see  whether 
they  hold  any  better  together. 

So,  gentlemen,  we  might  go  over  all  these  little  outside  scraps 
of  testimony  that  have  been  brought  in  here  as  a  sort  of  make- 
weight, but  it  would  be  consuming  too  much  of  your  time. 

I  will  hurry  on.  The  gentlemen  will  read  to  you  law  books,  and 
they  will  ask  you  to  take  those  law  books,  witli  their  worn  out 
maxims,  and  apply  them  with  the  rigidity  of  the  old  English 
common  law  to  the  questions  of  fact  involved.  They  claim 
that  this  case  is  to  be  governed  by  the  common  law,  so  do  we. 
Heartily  we  concur  with  the  prosecution  in  this  general  view, 
that  of  all  the  creations  of  man,  of  all  his  inventions,  prob- 
ably there  is  none  that  does  more  honor  to  his  intellect  than 
the  establishment  of  that  great  system  of  law  known  as  the 
English  common  law.  Now  the  English  common  law,  so  highly 
prized,  has  been  but  the  accreation  of  ages.  It  is  not  the  written 
law  of  the  land.  It  is  the  unwritten  law.  It  is  the  crystaliza- 
tion  of  the  habits,  the  customs,  the  usages,  of  the  people  of  Great 
Britain  into  judicial  decisions.  It  is,  therefore,  a  system  of  law 
that  has  sprung  emphatically  from  the  people.  The  common 
law  of  England  is  well-named,  for  it  springs  from  the  common 
heart  of  the  nation.  It  has  been  added  to  and  it  has  been  de- 
tracted from,  from  time  to  time,  as  civilization  has  advanced  or 
the  habits  of  the  people  changed.  It  is  being  added  to  now  as  the 
habits  of  the  people  change.  It  changes  with  the  people.  8(6 
that  where  you  find  a  maxim  of  the  common  law,  and  you  find  that 
it  is  not  in  harmony  with  the  civilization  of  the  day,  the  thought  and 
moral  sentiment  of  the  age,  you  have  found  a  maxim  of  the  common 
law  that  has  been  virtually  and  actually  repealed.  It  is  no  longer 
common  law,  but  common  error.  Now  let  me  illustrate.  I  am 
not  indulging  in  rhetoric,  lam  telling  you  what  I  regard  as  the 
truth.  Let  me  illustrate.  Years  ago,  under  the  English  com- 
mon law,  a  man  surd  another  for  the  seduction  of  his  daughter. 
What  did  he  have  to  charge  in  his  declaration?  Not  that  the  de- 
fendant seduced  his  daughter,  and  there  .stop.  Eur  upon  that  he 
could  not  recover,  but  the  suit  was  brought  and  the  plaintiff  laid 
the  allegation  in  his  declaration  that  the  defendant  seduced  his 
daughter — servitium  amisii — by  reason  of  which  he  lost  her  ser- 
vices. Not  by  reason  of  which  he  lost  the  honor  of  his  family;  by 
reason  Of  which  a  stain  and  disgrace  was  brought  upon  his  name, 
but  by  reason  of  which  he  lost  her  services. 

.Now,  1  am  illustrating  that  the  English  common  law,  whiclv 


86  TRIAL    OF   HARRY   CRAWFORD    BLACK 

has  been  cited  on  in  this  character  of  fuses,  gave  a  man  damages, 
not  for  the  honor  of  liis  violated  family,  but  because  he  had  lost 
the  services  of  his  servant.  She  was  no  longer  there  to  do  his 
household  drudgery.  That  was  the  idea.  That  was  the  only  ground 

upon  which  he  could  recover.  Why?  Because  the  common  law 
to  »k  no  cognizance  of  female  virtue.  Woman  was  not  the 
"noblest,  best  gift  of  (rod  to  man."  she  was  his  servant — his 
slave — nothing  more.  Time  goes  by.  There  is  no  statute  repeal- 
ing this  law.  Will  anybody  tell  yon  that  such  is  the  law  to-day? 
If  not,  when  and  how  was  it  repealed?  It  was  repealed  by 
that  statute  which  is  written  on  men's  hearts  and  is  illus- 
trated in  their  habits.  The  common  law  advances  with  the 
advancing  ideas  of  the  people.  I  am  going  along  and  coming 
down  to  the  present  day.  Even  now-,  it  is  necessary  to  lay  in  your 
declaration,  your  per.  quod,  yet  it  is  now  regarded,  and  the  books 
tell  you,  that  it  is  a  fiction.  It  is  a  fiction  of  the  law  and  the 
juries  are  instructed  to  disregard  it,  and  to  give  damages  commen- 
surate with  the  injury  done  to  the  reputation  of  the  female  and 
her  surroundings,  I  say.  gentlemen,  that  if  yon  are  to  take  the 
argument  of  counsel  on  the  other  side,  that  the  letter  of  the  law  is 
to  be  complied  with  as  though  a  written  statute,  that  you  will  lie 
asked  to  do  that  wdiich  is  not  consonant  with  the  common  law 
as  it  at  present  stands.  Under  the  old  common  law  a  man  was 
burned  in  the  hand  for  manslaughter,  while  a  woman  was  bung. 
No,  she  was  not  hung,  she  was  quartered  and  burnt.  Female  virtue 
had  no  value.  Females  themselves  were  only  looked  uponasof  any 
value,  insomuch  as  they  servedthe  interests  of  their  lords  and  mas- 
ters, and  yielded  to  his  pleasures.  And  the  written  law  has  not 
changed  this  state  of  affairs.  It  is  as  much  the  common  law  of  to- 
day on  the  theory  of  this  prosecution  as  it  was  two  hundred  years 
ago.  And  yet  they  will  tell  you  of  the  common  law  as  recognized 
by  the  authorities  of  that  day.  I  will  show  you,  gentlemen,  for  I 
do  not  like  these  things  to  be  taken  on  my  assertion,  what  these 
authorities  say. 

"•The  husband,  also,"  says  Blackstone,  "might  give  his  wife 
moderate  correction."  That  is  the  English  common  law,  where 
females  were  concerned,  to  which  our  learned  brothers  appeal. 
By  the  common  law  women  received  sentence  of  death  and  might 
be  executed  for  the  first  offense  in  simple  larceny;  while  lor  the 
same,  offense  a  man,  who  could  read,  was  subject  only  to  burning 
/  in  the  hand  and  a  few  months  imprisonment;  female  virtue  was 
exposed  to  the  slanders  of  malignity  and  falsehood;  the  purest 
maid  or  the  chastest  matron  was  no  more  protected  than  the  most 
meretricious  and  incontinent  of  women,  and  thus  female  honor, 
which  is  dearer  to  the  sex  than  their  lives,  was  left  by  the  com- 
mon law  to  be  the  sport  of  every  abandoned  calumniator. 

"Oh.  wretched  woman!    Oh,  defenceless  six! 
Of  the  whole  animated  race,  most  helpless. 

Much  of  this  law  has  been  changed  by  statute — all  of  it  by  pub- 
lic sentiment.  No,  except  by  the  fatbits  of  our  people  ;  except  by 
the  usages  that  civilization  has  introduced  this  law  remains  in 
almost  its  full  vigor. 

But  we  have  an  American  common  law,  as  well  as  an  English 


FOR    KILLING   COLONEL    W.    W.    M'kAIG,    JR.  87 

common  law.  Understand  me,  gentlemen^  it  is  now  tlio  Ameri- 
can common  law  that  a  man  may  recover  for  the  seduction  of  his 
daughter  although  lie  docs  not  prove  that  the  daughter  was  hiB 
servant.  Yet  the  English  common  law  requires  that  he  should 
prove  the  servitude.  I  say  thai  has  been  brought  about  by  Ameri- 
can usage  and  by  the  advance  of  civilization  which  recognizes 
the  dignity  of  your  mother;  which  recognizes  and  cherishes  the 
honor  and  virginity  of  your  daughter.  It  recognizes  the  fact  that 
she  is  no  longer  a  slave,  or  a  servant,  hut  that  she  is  as  a  help- 
mate to  the  man,  and  not  unfrequently  a  protector ;  and  not  as 
the  dog  that  follows  his  master  at  a  whistle  ;  but  that  she  is  the 
fairest  and  loveliest  of  created  things  by  our  great  Author  in  the 
image  formed  of  His  celestial  glory,  and  designed  to  be  man's  so- 
lace. This  is  due  to  the  advance  of  American  civilization,  and 
you  will  find  that  this  advance  has  been  made  in  other  respects, 
lis  well  as  this. 

I  say  this,  gentlemen,  that  in  the  United  States  of  America  no 
man  under  God's  canopy  has  ever  died  by  the  hand  of  the  law  for 
having  vindicated  the  honor  of  his  family  by  the  death  of  the 
seducer.  Fiction,  if  you  please,  call  it  fiction;  yea,,  it  is  a  fiction. 
The  Court  decided  in  the  Sickles  case — what?  Why,  the  English 
common  law  says  in  order  to  reduce  the  killing  to  manslaughter 
you  should  find  the  man  in  the  act  of  adultery.  The  Court  in  the 
Sickles  case  said:  "The  waving  of  the  handkerchief,  the  signal 
given,  is  equivalent  to  finding  him  in  the  act."  This  may  be  fic- 
tion, but  it  is  now  the  law. 

These  legal  reformations  have  not  been  suddenly  brought  about. 
They  have  advanced  to  this  height  step  by  step.  Judges  do  not 
discard  an  old  principle  of  the  law  all  at  once;  but  they  set  up  a 
fiction  here  and  a  fiction  there,  until  by  fiction  they  have  practi- 
cally abrogated  the  whole  of  it. 

This,  gentlemen,  is  no  mere  advocate's  plea  for  his  client;  but 
the  calm,  deliberate  utterance  of  a  well-considered  sentiment. 
Fathers  and  husbands  and  brothers  must  be  taught  that  the 
hearthstone,  around  which  gather  their  wives  and  daughters  and 
sisters,  is  a  charmed,  sacred  circle;  and  that  he  who  dares  invade 
it  must  pay  the  penalty  of  his  life.  (.You  may  kill  in  self-defense, 
this  is  sell-defense  in  its  sublimest  form.  What  is  a  mans  self? 
Is  it  his  mere  living,  breathing  anatomy?  A  thing  of  flesh  and 
blood  and  bone  and  sinew?  No  I  A  man's  self  is  more  than  this 
— it  is  his  honor. 

"Mino  honor  [9  111  v  life,  nofh  crow  in  one; 
Take  honor  trom  me,  and  my  life  is  done." 

Who  plays  a  game  to  rob  him  of  this  prize  should  stake  all  he 
has  upon  the  hazard  of  the  die — his  life. 

Now,  gentlemen,  I  feel  that  I  have  done,  however  imperfectly, 
all  that  can  be  reasonably  expected  of  me  in  this  cause.  lam 
disposed,  therefore,  to  leave  it  in  the  hands  of  those  who  are  as- 
sociated with  me.  The  time  is  come  toward  which  allot  us — you. 
the  honorable  bench,  my  distinguished  colleagues,  my  learned 
brothers  of  the  prosecution,  and  myself— have  been  struggling 
through  all  these  anxious  days.  In  a  few  hours  more  there,  will 
be  committed  to  your  keeping  that  which  is  the  most  precious 


88  TRIAL    OF    ITAItRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK. 

charge  that  can  bo  given  to  it,  the  destinies  of  a  human  being. 
When  your  verdict  is  recorded,  and  you  have  gone  forth  from  the 

court-house;  gone  back  to  the  cherished  i  ircle  of  your  loved  ones 
at  home,  to  your  mothers  and  sisters,  to  your  wives  and  daugh- 
ters— what  then  ?  Shall  we,  in  the  no  distant  future,  behold  a 
morbid  crowd,  hurrying,  some  bright  day,  into  the  town  of 
Cumberland,  and  standing  with  them  beneath  the  gallows,  shall 
we  gaze  upon  a  shrouded  figure,  hear  the  dull  thud  as  a  lifeless 
body  falls  through  the  scaffold  drop?  Shall  we  stand  bowed  and 
uncovered  around  an  open  grave,  and  hear  the  solemn  voice  of 
the  minister  of  God  as  he  pronounces  dust  to  dust,  ashes  to  ashes; 
witness  the  strong  agony  of  the  stricken  father,  and  hear  the 
heart-rending  shrieks  from  the  sorrowing  mother  as  the  cold 
clods  fall  on  the  coffined  breast  of  an  only  darling  son?  And  if 
some  curious  stranger  should  inquire  "whose  grave  is  this?"  shall 
he  l;e  told  that  it  is  the  grave  of  Harry  Crawford  Black,  who  was 
hung — yes,  hung — by  a  Frederick  county  jury  as  a  felon,  as  a 
murderer  because  he  slew  the  seducer  of  his  sister?  God  forbid 
that  such  shall  be  the  consequence  of  your  verdict.  Rather  let  it 
be  said,  gentlemen,  that  a  youth  in  the  vigor  of  manhood  entered 
an  humble  dwelling,  won  the  affections  of  her  who  was  its  dear- 
est treasure;  that  he  betrayed  her,  that  he  seduced  her,  that  he 
polluted  her,  that  he  afterward  vilified  her,  and  branded  her  in 
the  face  of  the  world  as  a  strumpet;  that  for  this  crime  her 
brother  killed  him,  that  he  was  tried  and  acquitted  by  a  Freder- 
ick county  jury,  who  thus  proclaimed  to  the  world  that  they 
cherished  the  honor  and  chastity  of  their  wives  and  daughters 
more  than  life  itself. 

Apologizing,  gentlemen,  for  the  time  I  have  occupied,  and 
thanking  you  for  the  very  marked  attention  you  have  given  me,  I 
leave  this  case  in  the  hands  of  those  who  are  better  able  to  take 
charge  of  it. 


SYNOPSIS 

OF  THE 

ARGUMENT  OF  WILLIAM  M.  PRICE. 


Gentlemen  of  the  Jury:  I  feel  much  embarrassed  in  coming 
before  you  after  having  beard  the  able  and  eloquent  argument  that 
lias  already  been  delivered,  more,  perhaps,  than  I  would  feel  if  1  had 
opened  the  ease.  I  am  here  a  stranger  among  you,  as  is  also  the  pris- 
oner at  the  bar;  away  from  his  native  place,  his  home,  the  scenes 
with  which  he  is  familiar,  the  community  in  which  he  is  loved  and 
respected,  he  sits  among  strangers,  not.  through  any  wish  of  his  own, 
but  at  the  instance  of  the  State  of  Maryland,  at  the  suggestion  and 
upon  the  oath  of  the  State's  attorney  for  Alleghany  county.  It  is  not 
Ids  fault  that  he  is  here;  but  he  has  no  fears  to  trust  his  rights,  his 
honor,  his  life  in  the  hands  of  a  Frederick  county  jury.  The  learned 
counsel  for  the  State  had  said  that  the  whole  city  of  Cumberland  was 
thrown  into  mourning  by  the  death  of  the  victim  of  this  unhappy 
tragedy.  If  that  be  the  fact,  if  such  was  the  grief  of  the  community, 
if  such  was  the  esteem  in  which  the  deceased  was  held,  why  was  not 
the  State  willing  to  go  to  trial  before  a  .jury  in  that  county?  McKaig 
had  wealthy  ami  influential  friends,  who  were  able  to  take  this  case. 
out  of  the  hands  of  the  State,  or  at  least  to  give  it  the  semblance  of  a 
private  rather  than  a  public  prosecution,  and,  as  you  have  no  doubt 
observed  that  which  has  been  patent,  to  all  who  have  attended  lliis 
trial,  siich  has  been  the  case.  With  all  such  influences  on  the  side  of 
the  State,  the  position  and  wealth  of  the  friends  of  the  deceased,  and 
the  alleged  sympathy  of  the  community,  it  is  singular  that  the  prose- 
cution has  tied  to  another  county  for  justice.  And  who  are  prosecuting 
here?  The  learned  attorney  general  says  he  has  no  interest  in  this 
case,  the  Stale's  attorney  of  this  county  says  he  has  no  interest  in  it. 
We  have  the  remarkable  anomoly  of  a  hired  prosecutor  for  private 
Vengeance,  seeking  the  blood  of  this  hoy  to  sat  iate  their  unholy  desires, 
for  revenge.  Why  I  hey  tied  from  Ibis  mourning  and  outraged  com- 
munity I.  Leave  you  to  answer. 

Gentlemen  of  the  jury,  ifyou  will  give  me  your  attention  for  a  few 
moments  1  shall  endeavor  to  present  you  this  cast:  as  it  has  struck  me 
during  its  progress. 

Mr.  Price  then  called  the  attention  of  the  jury  to  the  condition  and 
position  of  the  parties  on  the  fatal  morning. 

The  sister  was  absent  from  home  at  a  place  unknown  to  the  prisoner. 
The  fact  had  been  told  him  of  the  difficulty  between  his  father  and 
deceased,  but  the  true  reason  of  that  difficulty  he  bad  not  learned  until 


90  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

on  tli<'  Sunday  before  the  shooting.  That  he  did  know,  anything  about 
i<  before  is  only  an  inference  or  assumption ;  there  is  no  proof  of  ii. 
( »:i  Sunday  he  is  told  :i  1  about  it,  he  is  shown  the  letter  of  McKaig  to 
Myra,  appointing  a  meeting  at  his  (McKaig's)  house  in  the  absence  of 
his  wife ;  he  is  told  thatVMyTa  lias  a  child  four  months  old ;  he  is  told 
by  his  loving  and  blessed  mother  the  harrowing  facts  :  he  beholds  the 
shame,  the  deep,  dark,  and  damning  outrage  that  had  been  brought 
upoq  his  sister  and  the  family  by  McKaig;  heia  told  of  the  threats 
that  McKaig  had  made  against  him  ;  he  sees  the  ruin  of  all  his  cheiv 
ished  hopes  in  life  through  the  wiles  and  arts  of  the  seducer.  Gri 
God  !  ( !an  the  heart  of  man  pulsate  as  usual  under  the  fiery  ordeal  he 
was  then  passing  through  ?  Kuowingall  this,  feeling  and  seeing  all 
tliH.  is  it  any  wonder  the  seducer  fell  before  his  unerring  aim  ? 

Mr.  Price  then  gave  a  detailed  account  of  what  had  been  told  the 
prisoner  by  Lowndes,  Mrs.  Black.  Hen'shaw,  Long,  and  others,  as  to 
McKaig  being  the  seducer  of  his  (Black's)  sister,  &c.  He  argued  that 
Dougherty  and  Johnson  had  no  position  in  court  as  witnesses  as  against 
Long,  as  Long  had  told  what  he  had  seen,  and  what  they  ha  1  not ;  he 
stands  before  you,  as  jurors,  a>  fair  as  they  did,  and  as  worthy  of  belief. 

He  then  explained  the  position  of  the  witnesses  about  the  Revere 
House. 

The  counsel  then  proceeded  to  develop  the  theory  of  self-defense. 
Black  shot  McKaig  in  time  to  save  his  own  life.  Six  witnesses  swear 
that  they  saw  McKaig  draw  his  pistol  first.  Two  men,  Dr.  Healey  and 
Dr.  Smith,  have  sworn  that  they  did  not  see  a  pistol  in  McKaig's 
hand.  I>nt.  on  the  other  hand,  Six  reputable  witnesses  have  sworn 
that  they  did  see  a  pistol,  and,  after  hearing  the  ruling  of  the  Court 
the  other  day  as  to  the  value  of  negative  testimony,  there  should  be  no 
difficulty  as  to  which  statement  should  be  believed.  It  has  been  testi- 
fied by  two  witnesses  that  when  the  body  of  McKaigwas  lifted  up  that 
a  revolver  dropped  from  his  person,  which  Mr.  Tearney  picked  up. 
Tearney  himself  has  been  here  all  the  time,  and  yet  he  has  never  been 
put  upon  the  stand  to  say  whether  he  did  or  did  not  pick  up  a  pistol,  as 
the  other  witnessss  had  testified.  There  was  another  pistol,  which 
Tearney  did  not  see.  Two  pistols  were  exhibited  here  which  were 
admitted  to  have  been  taken  from  McKaig's  person.  Mr.  Price  said 
one  witness  says  McKaig  was  shot  in  the  hack,  and  another  says  in 
front.  As  to  where  Black  shot  him  is  not  an  issue  here.  He  shot  him 
in  self-defense.  Igo  no  further  than  that,  gentlemen  of  the  jury.  I 
say  that  Crawford  Black  having  heard  what  he  did  on  Saturday  even- 
ing, having  heard  what  he  did  on  Sunday,  and  believing,  as  lie  did, 
what  his  poor  broken-hearted  mother  told  him,  believing  that  McKaig 
was  the  seducer  of  his  sister,  I  say  that  the  prisoner,  or  his  father,  had 
the  right,  the  God-given  right,  to  slay  that  man  who  had  thus  treated 
them  wherever  they  met  him. 

We  have  no  statute  in  Maryland  to  punish  the  crime  of  seduction — 
the  Avorst  of  all  crimes.  And  why  have  we  not?  Because  God,  in  his 
wisdom,  knowing  the  enormit3r  of  the  crime,  the  blackness  of  darkness 
that  surrounds  the,  victim  of  the  lust  of  the  seducer,  hath  retained  the 
power  in  his  own  hands  to  punish  it,  and  appoints  his  instruments  to 
slay  the  seducer.  And  I  say  God  strengthen  the  heart  and  steady  the 
hand  that  speed  the  bullet  to  the  vitals  of  such  men.  And  who  had  a 
better  right  to  redress  the  wrongs  of  that  sister,  to  avenge  the  ruin 


FOR    KILLING   COLONEL    W.    W.    M'kAIG,    JR.  01 

brought  upon  that  household  than  the  brother?    You  cannot,  gentle- 
men, under  any  circumstances,  weigh  these  facts  :iu<l  then  give  dam- 
age in  the  parlies  who  claim  to  be  aggrieved  in  this  case. 
The  counsel  then  went  into  a  very  close  and  searching  review  of  all 

the  testimony  in  the  rase,  and  Ik  ire  down  very  hard  at  times  upon  some 
of  the  State's  witnesses,  hired  counsel,  &c,  and  stated  thai  we  stand 
here  declaring  that  Black  shot  McKaig  to  save  his  own  life:  .We  stand 
on  broader  ground  than  this.    Hehad  the  right  to  kill  the  seducer  of 

his  sister — to  redress  the  wrongs  inflicted  upon  his  family,  he  was  t l»o 
instrument  in  the  hands  of  God  to  satisfy  the  demands  of  an  offended 
justice. 

In  conclusion,  Mr.  Price  appealed  to  the  jury  as  men,  as  fathers,  as 
brothers,  as  upholders  of  female  virtue,  to  find  such  a  verdict  as  would 
reflect  the  sentiment  of  Frederick  county  on  the  crime  of  seduction, 
as  would  send  this  boy  back  to  bis  anxious  father,  mother,  and  friends, 
as  would  restore  him  to  those  who  loved  him  so  well,  as  would  say  to 
seducers  and  libertines  in  Alleghany  count}',  we  applaud  and  justify 
any  father,  husband,  or  brother  who  will  rid  this  beautiful  earth  of 
their  baleful  presence.  Your  wives,  daughters,  and  sisters  look  to  you, 
gentlemen,  to  render  such  a  verdict  in  this  case  as  will  protect  them 
from  such  insidious  foes. 


Won.  fa..  K-  ^yester 


ARGUMENT 

OF 

HON.   A.   K.   SYESTER. 


May  it  plea.se  tiie  Cotttct,  Gentlemen  of  the  Jury,  in 
dealing  with  a  case  on  which  the  life  or  death  of  a  human  being  is 
embarked,  I  desire  to  treat  of  the  facts  and  the  law  of  the  case, 
and  of  those  alone. 

I  shall  find  no  time,  and  I  entertain  no  inclination  whatever  to 
indulge  in  any  remarks  having  reference  to  the  relations  which 
any  persons  bear  to  this  case.  The  motives  which  may  actuate 
others  in  the  prosecution  of  my  client,  and  their  purposes  have 
nothing  to  do  with  the  real  cause  before  you,  except  so  far  as 
they  have  fashioned  and  given  tone  and  temper  to  the  prosecution 
itself. 

But  while  I  may  with  entire  propriety  withhold  the  expression 
of  any  opinion  on  the  subjects  just  alluded  to,  my  duty  compels  me 
to  advert  (and  my  feelings  may  lead  me  to  do  so  with  emphasis)  to 
some  of  the  circumstances  that  have  marked  this  prosecution,  and 
have  distinguished  it  for  bitterness,  above  anything  of  the  kind 
that  has  ever  faHen  under  my  notice  in  the  course  of  a  prac- 
tice of  over  seventeen  years.  Gentlemen,  the  importance  of  this 
case  to  the  prisoner  at  your  bar,  to  his  afflicted  and  heart-broken 
parents,  and  to  all  those  who  are  near  and  dear  to  him  by  the  ties 
of  nature  and  blood  cannot  be  magnified. 

To  him  it  involves  nothing  less  than  his  life — to  them  the 
crushing  sorrows  and  painful  griefs,  which  must  be  expressed  in 
tears  and  wretchedness  over  his  early  grave,  or  the  smiles  and 
joys  which  will  welcome  him  once  more  to  the  arms  of  a  family 
whose  name  he  has  not  dishonored,  and  to  the  bosom  of  a  society 
whose  peace  and  order  he  has  not  unlawfully  broken. 

You  find  him,  hiscouusel,  and  witnesses  all  strangers  before  you, 
and  the  prosecution  for  his  life  fortified  by  gentlemen  conspicuous 
for  their  ability,  learning,  and  experience. 

I  pass  over  the  circumstances  of  the  removal  of  this  case  at  the 
instance  of  the  prosecution,  and  the  draging  of  the  prisoner  over 
a  hundred  miles  away  from  his  home  to  be  tried  before  strangers. 
All  that  I  have  adverted  to  in  my  opening  state  of  facts  a  few  days 
ago. 

I  pass  over  other  circumstances,  prominent  in  this  case,  which 
have  occurred  to  me  as  unusual  and  unprecedented,  and  call  your 
attention  to  some  of  the  things  that  have  transpired  before  you, 
and  which  are  full  of  significance. 

Look,  in  the  first  place,  to  the  remarkable  fact  that  we  have 
been  engaged  now  for  nine  days  in  inquiring  into  a  transaction  that 


9,4  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

Occurred  in  the  presence  and  also  under  the  eyes  of  no  less  than 
twelve  or  thirteen  persons.  And  when  the  prosecution  under- 
took to  develop  the  facts  of  that  transaction  it  contented  itself 
with  calling  but  three  witnesses  out  of  the  twelve,  in  order  to  lay 
the  truth  before  you. 

One  of  those  witnesses  (Mr.  Conner)  saw  nothing  of  it,  except 
the  very  last  moment  of  the  scene  of  that  tragedy— he  saw  only 
the  dead  hody  of  McKaig.  Two  others,  Dr.  Healy  andMr.  Gross, 
saw  some  part  of  the  transaction.  Indeed,  it  is  quite  plain  that 
Gross  saw  no  part  of  the  beginning  of  the  transaction  at  all.  He 
saw  nothing  of  that  part  of  the  affair  which  is  the  turning  point 
in  the  whole  case,  and  which  is  the  one  great  controlling  central 
fact  in  this  whole  transaction.  He  tells  you  lie  was  looking  from 
a  window,  and  seeing  people  looking  up  street, looked  up  also,  and 
then  saw  McKaig  off  the  pavement  retreating  toward  the  north 
side  of  Baltimore  street,  Black  following  him. 

Now,  gentlemen,  that  part  of  the  affair  is  what  a  dozen  other 
witnesses  saw,  and  eight  of  them  saw  more.  Eight  others  saw 
what  this  prosecutionhas  openly  endeavored  to  suppress;  they 
saw  what  occurred  before  Mr.  Gross  looked  at  all,  and  it  is  just 
here,  around  what  occurred  before  Gross  saw  anything,  that  the 
whole  interest  of  this  case  centers.  It  is  around  what  transpired 
before  a  shot  was  fired  that  the  contest  in  this  case  rages,  and 
there  centers  and  concentrates  the  momentous  facts  of  this  trial, 
and  it  is  just  there,  as  to  what  took  place,  what  was  done  by 
these  parties  before  any  shot  was  fired  at  all  that  I  invite  your 
attention,  for  on  a  proper  and  and  clear  view  of  that  depends  the 
issues  of  life  and  death  here  as  they  were  made  up  and  staked  on 
that  fatal,  bloody  morning. 

Gentlemen,  Mr.  Gross  tells  you  he  was  looking  at  the  men  load- 
ing a  stove,  and  when  I  asked  him  why  he  should  have  put  him- 
self to  so  much  trouble  as  to  leave  his  work,  get  on  his  knees,  and 
crawl  over  his  work-bench  to  look  at  an  occurrence  which  he  must 
have  witnessed  a  hundred  times  in  his  life,  he  told  you  that  the 
reason  why  he  did  that  was  because  the  men  were  "straining" 
themselves  lifting  in  the  stove;  and  it  was  while  they  were  thus 
"  straining  themselves  "  he  saw  a  commotion  and  heard  the  report 
of  a  pistol.  He  looked,  and  McKaig  was  near  the  middle  of  the 
street.  Now,  in  the  subsequent  stages  of  the  case,  Mr.  Moore- 
head  is  called  by  the  prosecution,  and  he  swears  he  was  proprietor 
of  that  store;  that  he  had  been  engaged  in  loading  that  stove; 
that  the  stove  was  on  the  wagon,  and  all  hands  had  retired  into 
the  store-room,  looking  for  the  furniture  of  the  stove;  and  it  was 
then,  after  they  had  leftthe  street,  and  were  inside  that  he  heard  the 
report  of  a  pistol,  went  out,  and  saw  McKaig  in  the  middle  of  the 
street,  with  Black  at  his  back  or  side,  and  then  a  second  fire  or 
report  of  a  pistol. 

Nov/,  that  is  plainly  the  report  which  our  good  friend  Gross  called 
the  first  report,  and  this  prosecution  in  the  face  of  all  this  was 
willing  to  send  the  soul  of  this  boy  at  your  bar  to  eternity,  consign 
his  body  to  an  ignominious  grave,  and  couple  his  name  and  mem- 
ory with  the  crime  of  a  murderous  assassin  by  laying  before  you 
only  a  partial  view  of  the  matter  into  which  it  professed  to  be 


FOR   KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    M'KAIG,   JR.  95 

inquiring  with  the  sole  and  only  purpose  of  testing  its  truth,  its 
whole  truth,  and  nothing  but  the  truth. 

You  will  not  Jail  to  remember  that  the  prosecution  rested  itscase 
on  the  testimony  of  Dr.  Ilealy,  Mr.  Gross,  and  Cornelius  Conner, 
and  that  Moorehead  was  not  called  until  the  defense  opened  up 
the  whole  transaction,  which  T  here  declare  was  the  duty  of  the 
prosecution  to  have  done  in  the  first  place. 

Mr.  Gross  was  called  on  to  testify  to  what  this  prosecution  knew 
was  but  a  partial  view  of  the  case,  and  on  his  testimony,  revealing 
only  part  of  the  case,  with  full  knowledge  of  all  the.  other  facts,  i 
the  gentlemen  conducting  this  determined  and  energetic  prosecu- 
tion were  willing  to  rest  this  cause,  freighted  as  it  is  with  the 
life  of  a  young  man  whose  name  and  character  has  been  main- 
tained and  upheld  for  all  thai  is  orderly,  peaceful,  and  gentle  by 
the  unanimous  voice  of  the  entire  people  before  whom  he  has 
gone  in  and  out  from  his  childhood. 

Was  this  prosecution  dealing  fairly  and  candidly  with  you?  Are 
gentlemen  entitled  to  the  confidences  of  a  jury  when  found  resort- 
ing to  practices  like  that,  and  that,  too,  in  a  case  like  this?  Mr. 
Gross  saw  no  pistol  in  McKaig's  hands;  neither  did  Dr.  Ilealy  or 
any  other  witnesses  called  by  the  State.  Those  alone  who  saw 
least  of  this  affair  have  been  relied  on  by  the  prosecution,  and  they 
now  have  the  boldness  to  look  astonished  and  profess  wonder  at 
the  idea  of  the  prisoner  setting  up  the  doctrine  that  McKaig  was 
armed  with  deadly  weapons  that  morning,  and  would  have  you 
believe  that  they  participate  in  the  astonishment  of  Dr.  Ilealy, 
who  declared  on  his  oath  that  he  first  heard  of  McKaig  being 
armed  and  ready  to  tight  when  I  made  the  prisoners  statement 
the  other  day.  Why,  gentlemen,  the  street  that  morning  was 
strewn  with  pistols,  and  McKaig,  who  left  his  home  that  morn- 
ing '"in  the  peace  of  God  and  the  State  of  Maryland,"  was  a  walk- 
ing  battery,  armed  to  the  teetli  with  not  less  tii an  eighteen  deadly 
shots.  The  developments  of  the  entire  case  show  this,  and  show 
it,  too,  from  the  lips  of  witnesses  for  the  State,  and  yet  in  the  pres- 
ence of  all  this  you  have  been  gravely  told  that  nothing  was  ever 
heard  of  the  theory  of  self-defense  until  it  was  disclosed  by  me  in 
my  opening  statement. 

Follow  this  thing  one  step  further,  and  see  how  far  this  prose- 
cution has  been  dealing  candidly  with  the  jury,  and  fairly  with 
the  life  of  the  prisoner.  I  hold  in  my  hand  the  indictment  found 
by  the  grand  jury  of  Alleghany  county.  You  will  remember  that 
we,  the  defense,  called  a  witness,  Dr.  Hummelshine,  who  proved 
that  immediately  after  the  first  lire  he  saw  McKaig  witli  his  hands 
slightly  elevated  just  as  he  was  leaving  or  had  left  the  curb,  and 
that  a  dark  object  fell  as  if  from  his  hand,  and  which  the  witness 
thought  was  a  pistol.  .Now,  gentlemen,  will  you  believe  me  when 
I  tell  you  that  this  witness  Dr.  Hummelshine  was  the  only  witness 
on  whose  testimony  this  very  indictment  was  found?  And  can  it 
be  believed  by  any  candid  mind  that  all  he  would  say  was  not 
known  to  this  prosecution,  and  that  our  friends  refused  to  call 
him  because  they  knew  what  he  would  detail,  and  knew  that  his 
evidence  would  go  to  establish  the  very  defense  of  which  tbeyhave 
declared  to  you  and  this  court  they  were  in  profound  iguorance 


Of)  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

until  tb is  case  opened?  Tn  the  face  of  a  fact  like  that  what  be- 
comes of  all  the  affected  astonishment  of  the  gentlemen  at  what 
they  have  denominated  the  "pretended  theory  of  self-defense? "' 
And  is  not  this  worse  than  trifling  with  the  lives  of  the  people? 
Is  it  anything  else  than  a  barefaced,  unblushing,  unscrupulous 
attempt  to  drag  thiw  prisoner  tO  the  gallows;  to  hurry  him  to  an 
earl;  and  horrible  death  by  suppressing  evidences  that  establish 
his  innocence,  and  depriving  him  of  the  means  of  salvation  from 
a  doom  at  the  bare  contemplation  of  which  the  very  blood  runs 
cold? 

In  a  suit  for  property,  in  a  conflict  for  dollars  and  cents,  you 
may  not  and  do  not  call  a  witness  whose  testimony  may  ruin  your 
cause;  but  the  spirit  which  pervades  actions  of  that  kind  never 
before  obtruded  itself  in  a  capital  case,  except  in  the  hands  and  at 
the  bidding  of  those  whose  names  and  memories  are  linked  forever 
with  the  universal  horror  and  destestation  of  mankind,  because 
they  prostituted  the  forms  and  privileges  of  legal  procedures  into 
•  the  instruments  of  torment  and  death.  And  are  not  such  prac- 
tices as  these  against  the  honor,  "government,  and  dignity  of  the 
State?" 

It  is  true  the  State  has  a  profound  interest  in  the  preservation 
of  order  in  society,  and  in  protecting  the  body  politic  against  vio- 
lence, but  its  policy,  mercy,  and  humanity  requires  that  when  one 
of  its  citizens  stands  charged  with  a  crime,  against  which  it  has 
denounced  the  forfeiture  of  liberty  or  life,  every  fact,  every  cir- 
cumstance connected  with  the  transaction  which  forms  the  sub- 
ject of  inquiry  shall  he  fully  disclosed  and  impartially  unfolded, 
it  takes  no  pleasure  in  the  death  of  its  citizens;  delights  not  in 
the  misery  and  sorrow  of  its  people.  When  it  assumes  to  drag  any 
of  the  people  before  its  tribunals  charged  with  a  crime,  the  conse- 
quences of  which  are  so  fearful  and  revolting  as  those  denounced 
against  that  with  which  my  client  is  charged,  it  does  not  assume 
the  character  of  a  mere  bandying,  party  litigant,  gloating  over 
the  prospect  of  a  success  that  will  lay  an  adversary  low  in  the 
grave,  and  dishonor  his  name  and  memory  among  men. 

If  it  frowns  on  crime  it  ever  turns  witli  benignity  and  mercy  to 
the  accused.  It  wages  no  war  of  tricks,  devices,  and  artifices  upon 
the  people,  it  requires  that  before  a  hair  of  the  head  of  one  of  its 
people  shall  be  injured  under  a  criminal  charge  every  fact,  every 
circumstance  connected  with  the  transaction,  shall  be  rigorously 
ami  impartially  explored  and  scrupulously  eliminated. 

While  it  employs  all  its  power  to  bring  offenders  to  justice,  at 
the  same  tune,  m  consideration  of  the  liberty,  the  honor,  and 
lives  of  the  people,  and  the  warm  living  affection  that  cluster 
around  the  accused,  it  demands  that  every  thing  shall  be  fair, 
clear,  manifest,  and  certain;  and  that  before  a  feather's  weight 
shall  be  added  to  tiie  perilous  state  of  the  accused;  before  a,  single 
trace  of  anguish  shall  pierce  the  hearts  of  those  who  love  him,  or 
a  single  hair  of  his  head  shall  fall,  the  very  last  syllable  of  legal 
proof  shall  be  supplied,  so  that  nothing  dark,  nothing  oblique, 
nothing  unknown  or  unexplained  shall  remain.  It  requires  that 
everything  shall  be  fully  and  faithfully  unfolded,  nothing  with- 
held, nothing  suppressed.     Its  policy,  laws,  and  legal  procedures 


"FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    M'KAIG,   JR.  97 

areall  impregnated  with  that  Divine  sentiment  which  takes  noplea- 
sure  in  the  destruction  of  the  people,  but  would  rather  all  should 
live,  and  none  perish. 

Sirs,  if  I  am  right  in  this,  how  fearfully  and  fatally  at  war  with       \ 
the  genius  and  spirit  of  law  and  justice,  lias  been  the  conduct  of 
those  prosecutors,  in  attempting  to  lay  before  you  a  partial  reve- 
lation of  the  fads  you  are  sworn  to  inquire  into,  and  in  suppress- 
ing the  testimony  of  Dr.  Ilummolshine. 

Gentlemen,  you  may  now  begin  to  discover  something  of  the 
temper  and  purposes  of  this  prosecul  ion. 

Before  f  pass  to  the  facts  of  this  case,  there  is  one  other  circum- 
stance T  must  advert  to:  You  will  remember  that  we  offered  to 
show  the  seduction  and  ruin  of  Myra  Black,  the  prisoner's  sister, 
by  the  deceased.  When  that  offer  was  made  the  prosecution 
resisted  and  objected  to  it  as  not  competent  evidence  for  any  pur- 
pose in  this  cause;  and  upon  the  motion, and  at  the  instance  of  our 
learned  brothers  for  the  State,  the  Court  refused  to  allow  us  to 
prove  1  hat  fact.  Therefore,  Miss  Myra  Black  was  out  of  the  case. 
No  testimony  of  hers,  and  nothing  relating  to  her  history,  con- 
duct, or  character  was,  or  has  been  before  you;  all  excluded  at  the 
instance  of  the  State. 

The  opinion  of  the  Court,  ruling  out  all  that  evidence,  was  yet 
ringing  in  our  ears,  when  the  gentlemen  for  the  State  called  a 
witness  to  testify  to  the. general  character  of  that  lady,  to  degrade 
and  dishonor  the  very  name  and  character  of  her,  whose  evidence 
the  prosecution  had  just  objected  to,  and  excluded  from  the  jury. 

Can  you  conceive  the  motive  that  prompted  such  an  offer  after 
what  had  occurred?  Do  you  believe  that  these  gentlemen  called 
that  witness  and  propounded  such  a  question,  under  a  conviction, 
or  even  an  impression  on  their  minds  that  such  an  inquiry  would 
be  tolerated  for  one  moment?  Do  you  suppose  that  our  friends 
really  thought  that  the  general  character  of  that  ruined  and 
unhappy  lady  had  anything  to  do  with  this  case?  especially  after 
they  themselves  had  objected  to  the  only  circumstance  connected 
with  her  ruined  state,  which  would  have  given  even  ashadowto 
the  relevancy  of  such  testimony? 

Gentlemen  of  the  jury,  that  was  a  plain,  open,  undisguised 
attempt  to  trifle  with  your  intelligence,  and  wantonly  to  mortify 
the  prisoner,  Ids  parents,  and  relatives,  not  by  proving  any  fact 
of  hi  r  life,  but  by  laying  before  you  the  idle  gossips  and  slanderous 
conversations  of  ot  hers. 

I.  have  no  doubt  the  witness  called  (God  help  him,  I  can  not 
recall  the  creature's  name)  would  have  sworn  to  all  that  this  pros- 
ecution required,  i  doubt  not  he  would  have  told  us  that  he  was 
sifting  down  somewhere,  perhaps  on  a  store  box,  in  an  office,  or 
on  a  tombstone,  wil  h  somebody  no  l letter  than  himself,  discussing 
and  dissecting,  destroying  and  degrading  the  character  of  this, 
and  other  young  girls. 

It  is  an  easy  matter  for  young  gentlemen  to  do  such  things  as 
that,  especially  when  the  girl  herself  may  never  hear  of  it,  and 
when  her  parents  are  old  and  infirm,  and  her  brothers  far  away, 
engrossed  in  the  stern  battle  of  life. 

It  is  a  safe  occupation,  too,  because  young  girls  are  not  often 


93  TRIAL    OF   HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

dangerous,  ami  when  you  have  no  more  property  than  character 
or  honor,  you  way  hid  defiance  to  the  law,  which  denounces  its 
heaviest  judgments  against  the  slandererin  pecuniary  damages. 

But,  oil.  how  many  pure  names  have  been  blighted,  how  many 
blameless  characters  have  been  tarnished  by  just  such  persons  as 
these?  How  many  pure,  bat  si  ricken  hearts  have  felt  the  stings 
of  a  social  attainder  tingling  in  the  warm  currents  that  are 
throbbing  there,  all  unconscious,  that  perhaps  the  very  lips  that 
ilatteved  most,  had  whispered  the  lie  that  grew  and  grewunial  it 
overshadowed  hope  and  life  itself.  The  only  wonder  is,  thai  the 
swift  vengeance  of  Heaven  can  slumber  while  these  ministers  of 
hell  are  dragging  the  purest,  fairest,  and  bestof  God's  creation 
from  honor,  peace,  and  respectability,  to  shame  and  misery. 

Outcasts  from  Heaven  and  from  prayer,  as  such  men  are,  r 
know  that  society  sometimes  compounds  with  their  low  transgres- 
sions; but  what  do  you  think,  gentlemen,  of  a  prosecul  ion  against 
the  life  of  a  fellow-citizen  that  will  lay  its  hands  on  a  thing 
so  unclean,  and  make  it  the  channel  through  which  the  undi- 
luted stream  of  evidence  shall  flow  to  a  jury? 

Let  us  now  address  ourselves  to  the  lawand  facts  of  the  case,  of 
which  you,  gentlemen,  are  the  sole  judges  under  the  constitution 
of  this  State.  With  the  law  as  well  as  the  facts  you  and  you  alone 
must  deal  in  making  up  the  verdict  here.  You  cannot  receive  a 
binding  instruction  on  either  from  the  Court. 

In  criminal  cases  the  jury,  not  their  honors  on  the  bench,  but 
the  jury  are  to  judge  the  law.  and  a  more  solemn  and  responsible 
obligation  cannot  be  imposed  on  men.  You  must  not  only  And 
what  is  true  in  point  of  fact,  as  connected  with  this  transaction, 
but  having  found  what  is  true,  you  must  apply  the  law  to  those 
facts,  and  determine  whether  the  prisoner  be  guilty  or  not  guilty. 
This  is  your  exclusive  duty.  You  will  see  at  a  glance  the  high 
and  delicate  grounds  you  occupy.  From  your  decision  there  lies 
no  appeal;  what  you  shall  determine  is  fixed,  and  there  is  no  power 
under  the  laws  of  this  State  to  revise  your  judgment  or  review 
the  grounds  of  your  determination. 

A  mistake  here,  a  hasty  ill-advised  conclusion,  an  erroneous 
judgment,  an  omission  to  give  due  weight  to  any  principle  of  law, 
or  an  indifference  to,  or  ignorance  of,  any  of  the  elements  which,  at 
law,  go  to  make  the  crime  of  murder,  may  drag  my  client  to  death, 
lay  sorrowand  wretchedness  on  the  bumble  hearthstone  of  a  fam- 
ily already  sufficiently  miserable,  and  become  the  source  of  painful 
'and  unavailing  regret  to  all  of  you  during  the  remainder  of  your 
days  on  earth. 

The  prisoner  stands  before  you  to-day  just  on  the  threshold  of 
life  with  all  its  bounding  hopes,  its  fair  visions,  and  bright  pros- 
pects before  him,  and  your  verdict  must  determine  whether  all 
these  shall  be  shut  up  and  concluded  forever  in  the  solemn  silence 
of  the  grave,  or  whether  he,  while  the  dews  of  his  morning  are 
yet  fresh  and  bright  upon  his  brow,  shall  be  returned  again  to  that 
life  of  usefulness,  honor,  and  respectability  on  which  he  had  just 
entered  when  its  brightness  was  suddenly  darkened  by  this  prose- 
cution. 

It  is  a  fearful  thing  to  deal  with  life,  and  yet,  as  I  have  said, 


FOR  KILLING   COLONEL   W.   W.   M'KAIG,   JR.  '.'  9 

from  your  judgment  in  this  case  there  is  no  appeal;  there  is  no  j 
revisionary  power  which  can  review  its  soundness,  explore  its 
errors,  if  error  there  shall  be,  and  right  the  wrong  which  indiffer- 
ence or  inattention  may  inflict— for  such  is  the  law  of  this  State 
of  Maryland.  Indeed  there  is  no  part  of  this  trial,  neither  the 
part  that  you  perform,  which  is  by  far  the  most  responsible,  and 
sacred,  nor  the  part  imposed  upon  the  Court,  that  can  ever  become 
the  subject  of  review  or  revision  byany  other  tribunal  in  the  land. 

If  my  client  were  before  this  Court  contending  for  Ids  right  to 
property,  even  of  the  small  value  of  seventy-live  or  eighty  dollars, 
yes,  even  of  (ifty-one  dollars,  everything;  connected  with  such  a. 
trial  would  become  legtimate  objects  of  appeal,  and  revision  be- 
fore the  higher  tribunals  of  the  State.  If  in  such  a  case,  a  trial 
for  the1,  value  of  a  horse  worth  but  fifty-one  dollars,  originating  in 
thisCourt,  their  honors  should  allow  an  item  of  illegal  evidence  to 
be  laid  before  you,  that  ruling  would  become  the  subject  of  revis- 
ion before  the'  high  Court  of  Appeals  of  the  State,  and  upon  dis- 
covering error  in  such  a  ruling  that  court  would  send  the  case 
back  here  for  a  new  trial. 

If  an  item  of  evidence  offered  by  a  defendant  in  a  case  originat- 
ing in  our  circuit  courts,  where  the  amount  in  controversy  ex- 
ceeds fifty  dollars  is  rejected,  that  rejected  offer,  at  hi- election, 
may  be  carried  to  the  appellate  court,  and  the  party  feeling  him- 
self aggrieved  is  clothed  with  the  right  to  have  the  judgment  of 
that  tribunal  asto  thesubject-matter  of  his  appeal;  butadefendant 
on  trial  for  his  life  enjoys  no  such  privilege  under  the  laws  of  this 
"good  old  State  of  Maryland." 

If  the  inferior  court  determine  against  a  prisoner  on  a  question 
of  evidence  affecting  his  life,  he  enjoys  no  right  of  appeal,  but  if  it 
concerned  not  his  life,  but  an  article  of  property  worth  not  less 
than  fifty  dollars  and  ten  cents,  lie  may  invoke  the  enlightened 
judgment  of  the  eight  judges  of  our  appellate  court. 

If  in  a  question  concerning  character,  and  where  a  jury  had 
returned  a  verdict  of  one  cent  damages,  the  party  defendant  feels 
himself  aggrieved,  either  by  the  rejection  of  proffered  evidence  or 
the  admission  of  evidence  against  him,  or  by  the  instructions  of 
the  Court  against  him,  he  may  have  the  entire  matter  reviewed 
before  the  appellate  tribunal,  and  if  there  be  error  in  any  of  the 
opinions  of  the  nisi  priua  court,  that  defendant  may  have  a  new 
trial  in  reference  to  that  one  cent  damage;  but  where  character, 
honor,  life,  the  affections  of  whole  families,  the  joys  and  loves,  or 
sorrows  and  woes  of  parents  or  children  are  involved,  this  "gal- 
lant State  of  Maryland  "  of  ours  gives  no  such  right.  There  is  no 
bill  of  exception  in  any  criminal  case  in  this  State.  Whatever  is 
clone  in  the  nisipriua  court  in  such  cases  is  final.  You  may  ask 
and  obtain  a  binding  instruction  in  any  civil  case,  and  if  the  Court 
refuse  your  application,  you  may  appeal  and  reverse  that  judg- 
ment, but  in  a  ease  like  this,  if  an  instruction  were  asked  lor  and 
denied,  that  denial  would  form  no  subject  of  appeal. 

Indeed,  gentlemen,  if  the  Court  should  assume  to  instruct  you 
without  the  consent  of  both  counsel  for  State  and  prisoner,  such 
instruction  would  not  be  binding  on  you;  you  would  still  be  at 
liberty  to  disregard  the  instruction,  and  determine  the  law  accord- 


100  TRIAL   OF   HARRY   CRAWFORD   BLACK 

iiiC  to  your  own  judgments.  In  viewofall  this,  I  am  quite  sure 
will  bear  with  me  while  I  attempt,  in  the  first  place,  to  lay  b 
you  and  make  plain  the  principles  of  law  that,  in  my  judgment, 
govern  and  control  this  case,  f If  I  can  aid  you.  gentlemen,  in  com- 
ingtoa  just  conclusion  on  ttfat  subject  there  will  belefl  but  one 
Other  subject:  the  facts,  on  -which  you  are  to  pass,  and  upon 
that  I  feel  such  great  reliance  in  your  capacity  and  intelligence  to 
collate,  digest,  and  comprehend  them  that  I  shall  trespass  but  a 
few  moments  on  your  time  in  their  consideration.    ) 

I  have  adverted  to  the  differences  made  by  the  law  of  this  State 
between  a  party  contending  for  money  or  property,  and  a  man 
struggling  for  his  life  in  no  spirit  of  complaint,  (although  I  have 
always  regarded  it  as  a  stain  ami  blemish  on  a  judicial  system 
which  prides  itself  so  much  on  its  justice  and  equality.)  but  t  have 
done  so  for  the  purpose  of  advertising  you  of  the  tremendous  re- 
sponsibilities that  lie  before  you,  and  of  admonishing  yon  of  the 
care  and  caution  with  which  you  ought  to  govern  yourselves  in 
traversing  those  paths  of  inquiry,  on  which  your  feet  are  now 
pressing,  perhaps,  for  the  first  time  in  your  lives. 

Now,  gentlemen,  the  very  first  step  in  an  inquiry  like  this  con- 
fronts us  with  a  doctrine  as  venerable  and  indestructible  as  the 
common  law  itself,  a  doctrine  that  meets  the  accused  in  every 
c.ise,  on  the  very  threshold  of  his  trial,  that  walks  with  him 
through  the  fiery  ordeal  of  the  prosecution,  shielding  and  defend- 
ing him  against  all  presumptions,  and  like  a  blessing  and  benedic- 
tion, raising  up  every  presumption  in  favor  of  innocence. 

It  is  in  obedience  to  this  principle  that  the  whole  burden  of 
proof  falls  on  the  prosecution, and  there  it  rests  until  the  last  item 
of  proof  is  supplied,  it  never  shifts,  and  this  legal  presumpiion  of 
innocence  is  to  be  regarded  by  the  jury,  not  as  a  mere  theory  or  an 
unmeaning  thing,  not  as  idle  talk  or  mere  verbiage,  but  as  matter 
of  evidence,  to  the  benefit  of  which  the  party  accused  is  entitled.  I 
say  not  as  a  myth,  or  something  without  any  significance,  but  as 
evidence.  I  refer  to  1st  Greeuleaf,  sec.  34.  Moreover,  there  is  a 
wide  difference  in  the  standard  of  proof  as  applied  to  criminal  and 
civil  cases.  In  criminal  cases  the  law  has  attempted  to  set  up  a 
standard  of  proof,  and,  so  far  as  human  thought  and  language  can 
do  so,  it  does  deiine  the  degree  and  quality  of  evidence  necessary 
for  a  conviction. 

You  will  see,  gentlemen,  if  you  will  give  me  your  attention,  how 
cautious,  how  careful  the  law  is  on  tins  point.  You  will  see  every 
form  of  expression  used,  in  order  to  set  this  matter  in  a  clear 
light,  and  will  notice  the  plain,  direct,  concise  language  employed 
to  enforce  it.  You  will  not  fail  to  notice  how  solicitous  the  law  is 
to  draw  broad,  clear,  deep  lines  of  distinction  between  those  evi- 
dences and  proofs  wliich  goyen  us  in  ordinary  civil  cases  ami  those 
strong,  convincing,  and  manifest  assurances  which  must  be  devel- 
oped in  cases  of  this  kind.  You  will  find  that  this  is  no  case  in 
which  you  are  at  liberty  to  scrutinize  and  explore  mere  probabili- 
ties; no  room  here  for  weighing  the  preponderance  of  evidence, 
nor  considering  the  weight  of  prepondering  evidence.  Nothing 
but  those  proofs  that  generate  conviction  to  the  exclusion  of  ail 
reasonable  doubt;  nothing  short  of  such  proofs  and  evidences  can 
justify  a  verdict  against  the  prisoner  at  the  bar,  unless  at  the  baz- 


FOR    KQMNG    COLONEL    W.    W.    m'kAIG,    JR.  101 

ard  of  the  oaths  you  took  to  administer  in  its  letter  and  in  its 
spirit  the  law  T  am  now  about  to  read.  I  read  from  sec.  29th  of  3d 
Greenleaf  on  Evidence: 

"A  distinction  is  to  be  noted  between  civil  and  criminal  cases  in 
respect  to  the  degree  or  quantity  of  evidence  necessary  to  justify 
the  jury  in  finding  their  verdict  for  the  government.  In  civil 
Gases  their  duty  is  to  weigh  the  evidence  carefully,  and  find  for 
the  party  in  whose  favor  the  evidence  preponderates.  But  in 
criminal  trials  the  party  accused  is  entitled  to  the  legal  presump- 
tion in  favor  of  innocence,  which,  in  doubtful  cases,  is  always  suffi- 
cient to  turn  the  scale  in  his  favor.  It  is,  therefore,  a  rule  of  crimi- 
nal law  that  the  guilt  of  the  accused  must  be  fully  proved. 

'.'Neither  a  mere  preponderance  of  evidence,  nor  any  weight  of 
preponderant  evidence  is  sufficient  for  the  purpose  unless  it  gene- 
rate full  belief  of  the  fact  to  the  exclusion  of  all  reasonable  doubt. 
The  oath  administered  to  jurors  according  to  the  common  law  is 
in  accordance  with  this  distinction. 

"'In  civil  cases  they  are  sworn  well  and  truly  to  try  the  issue 
between  tin1  parties  according  to  the  law  and  evidence  given;  but 
in  criminal  cases  their  oath  is"'  well  and  truly  to  try,  and  a  true  de- 
li veranee  make  between  the  State  and  the  prisoner  at  the  bar.  *  * 
For  it  is  not  enough  that  the  evidence  goes  to  show  his  guilt:  it 
must  be  inconsistent  with  the  reasonable  supposition  of  his  inno- 
cence; it  is  better  to  en-  in  acquitting  than  in  punishing,  on  the 
side  of  mereey  than  on  the  side  of  justice.'" 

Now,  that,  gentlemen,  is  but  the  general  principle  that  lies  at  the  \ 
foundation  of  all  criminal  trials.  It  is  a,  proposition  engrafted  on 
the  criminal  law  long  before  the  book  I  have  read  it  from  was 
written;  and,  indeed,  before  any  regular  treatise  on  the  common 
law  was  written  by  any  one.  It  existed  and  was  conspicuous  when 
all  other  principles  of  law  applicable  to  the  investigation  of  crime 
were  in  utter  confusion  and  obscurity,  for  we  read  in  a  note  to 
that  same  section  that  King  Alfred  of  England  caused  forty-four 
of  his  judges  to  be  hanged  in  one  year,  because  of  their  false  judg- 
ments in  this  particular.  I  will  read  it  to  you,  and  I  beg  you  to 
notice,  its  strong,  masculjJ^  language.  It  is  taken  from  the  Mir- 
ror, written  at  a,  early^^od.  which  "reckons  it  to  be  among  the 
tthitst s  of  the  common  l?tw 'that  justices  and  their  officers  who  kill 
the  people  by  false  judgments  be  not  destroyed  as  other  murder- 
ers, which  Xing  Alfred  caused  to  be  done,  who  had  forty-four 
justices,  in  one  year,  banged  because  of  their  false  judgment. 
From  that  day  to  this  that  principle  of  criminal  law  has  been  dear 
to  all  those  who  value  the  rights,  the  liberties,  and  lives  of  the 
people.  Whatever  else  has  changed,  whatever  else  has  been  as- 
sailed, whatever  else  has  fluctuated,  this  has  stood  its  ground 
unmoved,  unassailed,  and  untroubled. 

[f  has  stood  by  the  accused  tor  centuries,  and  in  the  midst  of 
passion  and  feeling. of  vengeance  and  oppression,  whennighthuhg 
low  and  wild  over  the  dashing  waters  of  persecution  and  oppres-  ■ 
sive  power, it  has  thi'own  f;(  rout  on  tin-,  troubled  scene  the  promises 
01  hope  and  life,  where  otherwise  dispair  and  death  had  ruled 
a.  nd  rode  supreme.  It,  is  the  spirit  and  genius  of  the  old  colon  ion 
law  of  England,  under  whose  auspicies  so   many  innocent  men 


102  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

have  successfully  braved  the  frowns  of  power  and  walker!  un- 
scathed, and  unharmed  through  the  fiery  furnace  of  prosecutions, 
marked  and  distinguished  by  every  circumstance  of  power,  venge- 
ance, and  oppression. 

I  invoke  it,  to-day,  for  this  boy,  and  demand  it  in  the  name  of 
that  oath  by  which  each  one  of  you  bound  yourselves  to  the  throne 
of  eternal  justice,  to  administer  the  law  of  the  land  in  this  case. 

With  this  great  cardinal  principle  before  us,  let  us  proceed  to 
the  examination  of  some  of  the  facts  as  connected  with  the  homi- 
cide. 

My  client  has  been  denounced  as  a  murderer  and  an  assassin. 
He  has  been  presented  before  this  Court  and  before  you.  as  hav- 
ing gone  stealthily  about  the  streets  of  Cumberland,  and  in  the 
neighborhood  of  the  place  of  McKaig's  business,  peering  into 
windows  and  skulking  into  door-ways,  waiting  and  watching  to 
take  his  victim  at  disadvantage,  and  without  warning  to  set  upon 
and  kill  him.  And  terms,  which  were  galling  to  a  sensitive  mind 
in  the  extreme,  have  been  employed  to  describe  the  transaction. 
which  has  been  unfolded  to  you  by"  the  evidence,  and  the  main  facts 
of  whi  ch  I  will  now  recall  to  your  recollection,  and  then  apply  the 
law  specifically  applicable  to  those  facts. 

On  that  October  morning  you  find  the  prisoner  walking  along 
the  south  side  of  Baltimore  street,  in  Cumberland,  westward. 
About  the  same  time  McKaig  is  found  going  eastward  along  the 
north  side  of  the  same  street.  When,  from  the  distance  that  sep- 
arated them,  it  was  probable  that  each  one  could  have  seen  the 
other,  McKaig  leaves  the  side  of  the  street  he  is  walking  on,  and 
deliberately  crosses  over  to  the  side  on  which  Black  is  walkiug. 

Now,  gentlemen,  if  such  a  fact  as  that  had  been  proven  as  to 
Black,  what  a  theme  for  declamation  and  denunciation  would  it 
not  have  furnished  to  our  friends  prosecuting  in  this  case? 

Why,  because  he  walked  past  McKaig's  place  of  business  that 
morning,  and  dared  to  turn  his  head  or  eye  toward  the  windows 
of  that  foundry  this  prosecution  has  attempted  to  extract  from 
that  circumstance  strong  and  satisfactory  proof  that  he  was  there, 
in  their  own  expressive  vernacular,  BJLskulking."  Because  he 
passed  that  morning  along  center  stnM^as  he  had  passed  hun- 
dreds of  times  before,  and,  as  the  proof  slfbws  you,  he  must  pass 
to  go  into  the  business  part  of  the  town  ;  he  is  described  as  laying 
in  wait. 

Because  he  was  seen  standing  on  the  step,  and  in  the  door-way 
of  a  public  store,  on  the  principal  street  in  Cumberland,  when 
McKaig  was  nowhere  in  sight,  he  has  been  denounced  as  having 
concealed  himself  for  the  purpose  of  avoiding  the  observation  of 
McKaig,  the  better  and  surer  to  affect  his  murderous  purpose  of 
springing  upon  him  and  dealing  death  to  his  person. 

If  a  fact  like  this  had,  or  could  have,  been  shown;  if  Black  had 
crossed  over  to  the  side  McKaig  was  on,  you  would  have  heard  the 
loud,  indignant,  and  triumphant  declamations  of  our  friends  on 
the  subject  until  tills  court  hall  would  have  echoed  and  reechoed, 
with  their  noisey  clamor  for  his  life.  And,  indeed,  it  is  a  signifi- 
cant fact;  one  that  would  have  been  ugly  enough  for  us  to  have 
explained,  but  it--  significance  is  in  no  respect  diminished,  because 
it  was  McKaig  and  not  Black  who  crossed  over. 


FOR   KILLING   COLONEL    W.    W.    m'kAIG,   JR.  103 

You  will  remember,  gentlemen,  that  that  was  not  the  first  time 
McKaig  had  gone  out  of  Ms  way  to  intercept  the  prisoner.  You 
have  heard  enough  to  satisfy  you  that  McKaig  not  only  did  not: 
hesitate  to  go  out  of  his  way  to  meet  Black  face  to  face,  but  that 
on  one  occasion  he  went  far  enough  to  have  provoked  an  en- 
counter had  the  prisoner  been  less  orderly  and  peaceful  in  his 
disposition. 

You  cannot  overlook  the  affair  at  Furgeson's  saloon,  where  the 
prisoner  was  wantonly  jostled  and  insulted,  and  where  he  re- 
minded McKaig  that  that  affair  constituted  the  second  insult  lie 
had  offered  that  day.  What  the  first  was  we  have  not  been  able 
to  show  you.  You  cannot  fail  to  remember,  also,  what  had  occur- 
red under  the  eye  of  John  Long,  and  the  communication  made  by 
Long  to  Black. 

If  these  things  had  been  done  by  Black  toward  McKaig;  if  Black 
could  be  shown  to  have  previously  gone  out  of  his  way  to  encoun- 
ter McKaig;  if  he  could  have  been  shown  to  have  wantonly  in- 
sulted him,  and  have  stood  and  waited  and  watched  for  him,  and 
then  to  have  followed  him  along  the  street,  and  then  on  that 
morning  of  the  17ih  of  October,  could  have  been  shown  to  have 
left  the  side  of  the  street  lie  was  walking  on  ami  gone  over  to  that 
on  which  McKaig  was  passing,  then  would  these  gentlemen  prose- 
cuting have  found  in  all  these  things  an  argument  powerful  and 
overwhelming  on  the  point,  that  the  crossing  and  the  meeting 
was  with  no  peaceful  purpose,  but  that  it  was  the  offspring  of  a 
deliberate,  studied,  settled  purpose  to  force  an  encounter  on  an 
unwilling  and  unoffending  mail. 

But  dothese  acts  loose  t  heir  significance  because  they  were  done 
by  McKaig  and  not  by  Black?  Is  there  any  reason  why  they 
should  be  supposed  to  indicate  a  motive  or  design,  as  to  one,  and 
not  as  to  the  other?  Are  you  to  presume  that  McKaig  was  with- 
out a  motive  when  he  crossed  that  street?  But  can  you  hesitate 
in  discovering  that  motive  in  the  light  of  his  previous  behavior 
toward  the  prisoner? 

We  must  judge  men  by  their  conduct;  you  have  been  invoked 
to  judge  the  prisoner  by  his;  you  have  been  told  that  his  walking 
by  McKaig's  foundry  that  morning,  his  standing  in  the  door  of  a 
public  store  in  broad  day  light,  furnish  indices  of  a  motive  on  his 
part  to  lay  in  wait,  and  conceal  himself,  the  better  and  more 
surely  to  effect  murderous  purposes.  Apply  the  same  judgment 
to  the  conduct  of  the  deceased;  subject  bis  acts  to  the  same  scru- 
tiny to  which  they  would  subject  those  of  Black,  and  your  infer- 
ences will  not  be  of  thai  overs  trail  led,  farfetched  character  which, 
I  am  sure,  every  candid  mind  must  say  marked  the  conclusion 
drawn  by  the  prosecution  from  the  ads  of  Black. 

Eere,  gentlemen,  are  acts  that  lie  close  to  mol  ives;  here  is  con- 
duct that  is  hardly  to  be  misinterpreted.  Let  us  go  one  step 
further.  McKaig  bas  crossed  to  tin'  side  on  which  he  must  have 
seen  Black;  they  meet  face  to  face;  there  is  no  livingcreature  who 
saw  the  beginning  of  that  encounter.  Not  a  single  man,  woman, 
or  child  who  swears  at  what  time  eil  her  of  these  pari  ies  drew  his 

pistol.    That  both  were  armed  is  too  plain  for  argument.    That 
each  drew  his  revolver  is  equally  plain.    But  who  drew  first? 


10-i  TRIAL   OF   H\RRY   CRAWFORD   BLACK 

Which  of  these  two  marl  ;the  firsl  hostile  demonstration  no  human 
being  is  found  to  tell  us. 

That  is  a  matter  of  inference  and  inference  alone;  it  is  a  matter 
of  presumption,  and  of  presumption  alone:  it  is  a  faet  to  be  in- 
ferred, or  to  be  ptesumed;  il  lias  not  been  shown  by  any  direct 
proof.  Lt  is  to  be  presumed,  it  must  be  inferred,  by  circumstan- 
ces and  circumstances  alone.  It  lathe  all-controlling  fact  in  this 
case;  the  central  fact,  around  which  the  interest  and  issues  of 
this  case  congregate  and  thicken.  But  it  can  only  be  ascertained 
by  circumstances,  circumstantial  evidence.  How  are  we  to  deal 
with  it  ?  What  is  the  rule  of  criminal  law  when  we  come  to  deal 
with  circumstantial  evidence? 

My  brother  Nelson  has  read  to  yon  the  rule  on  that  subject,  as 
laid  down  by  Baron  Alderson,  a  rule  which  is  in  perfect  harmony 
with  the  spirit  of  that  great  fundamental  and  unalterable  rule 
which  I  have  endeavored  to  impress  upon  you.  lie  has  read  that 
rule  from  one  of  the  ablest  law  writers  that  ever  wrote.  Before 
you  can  convict  my  client  you  must  be  convinced  that  he  com- 
menced that  fight  by  first  drawing  his  pistol.  And  the  conviction 
of  that  fact,  on  your  minds,  must  be  something  more  than  a 
rational  conviction,  it  must,  be,  in  the  language  of  the  rule  read, 
1  the  only  rational  conviction  which  the  circumstances  will  enable 
you  to  draw," 

Gentlemen,  are  you  at  all  convinced  that  Black  first  drew  his 
pistol  ?  Does  the  subsequent  occurrences  satisfy  you  of  that  fact? 
Does  all  that  preceded  that  meeting,  all  that  attend  it,  and  all 
that  followed  it.  produce  upon  your  minds  the  conviction  that 
Black  was  the.  first  to  show  hostility?  And  is  that  the  only 
rational  conviction  which  the  circumstances  enable  you  to  draw? 

Just  look  at  this  case!  At  this  point  you  are  left  to  find  your 
way  to  the  heart  of  the  case,  to  its  thinking  head  and  beating 
heart,  by  the  light  of  other  facts — by  circumstances.  You  are  to 
find  that  Black  commenced  that  assault,  not  from  what  anybody 
saw,  but  from  other  facts.  What  other  facts?  Because  he  was 
armed?    Why,  McKaig  had  three  pisiols  to  his  one. 

Consider  for  one  moment  this  circumstance;  seven  witnesses 
called  by  the  defense  sawa  pistol  in  McKaig's  hand,  or  sawit  fall- 
ing from  his  hand  after  the  fir'st  fire,  and  before  the  second.  It  is 
in  proof  before  you  that  the  fust  lire  took  effect  in  McKaig's  side, 
and  passed  nearly  through  his  body. 

Do  you  believe  that  after  a  shot  like  that,  shocking  and  paralyz- 
ing his  entire  system,  and  shattering  his  strength,  lie  was  aide  to 
have  reached  behind  him  and  drawn  a  pistol  from  his  holster? 
No,  no;  that  pistol  which  fell  from  his  right  hand  after  the  lirst, 
and  before  the  second  shot  was  delivered,  was  in  that  right  hand 
before  any  shot  was  fired — before  Black  tired  at  all. 

It  is  absolutely  impossible  to  conceive  how  any  other  conclusion 
can  be  drawn.  The  ball  that  struck  McKaig  was  as  large  as  au 
ordinary  Minnie  ball.  The  parties  were,  not  five  feet  apart;  the 
ball  passed  nearly  through  the  body,  and  under  the  sudden,  shat- 
tering shock  and  prostrating  paralysis  of  that  deadly  fire,  and  in 
the  brief  interval  that  elapsed  before  the  second  shot,  it  is  incred- 
ible that  McKaig,  or  any  other  man  in  his  situation,  could  have 
reached  behind  him  and  drawn  a  nistol.     That  nistol  was  in  Mc- 


FOR  KILLING  COLONEL  W.  W.  Bl'ZAIG,  JR.      105 

Kaig's  right  hand  before  he  was  shot.    And  this  view  of  the 
case  is  powerfully  confirmed  by  the  testimony  of  Enos  Davis. 

That  witness  saw  McKaig  cross  the  street;  he  saw  him  when  he 
reached  the  curb  at  Ryan's  corner,  and  there  he  saw  him  change 
his  cane  from  his  right  to  his  left  hand  and  reach  back.  He  saw 
more — he  saw  something  ''glisten."  Now,  that  took  place,  accord- 
ing to  these  maps,  some  ten  or  twelve  steps  from  the  place  where 
he  was  when  attention  was  arrested  by  the  first  lire.  Black's  lire 
could  not  have  been  delivered  until  the  parties  were  within  four 
or  five  feet  of  each  other,  certainly;  after  the  first  fire,  and  when 
attention  was  arrested,  McKaig  is  found  some  ten  or  twelve  feet 
beyond  the  place  where  Davis  saw  him  change  his  cane  and  reach 
behind  for  his  pistol. 

At  what  precise  point  of  time  that  pistol  was  drawn  cannot  be 
ascertained  with  precision.  But  every  principle  of  law,  the  spirit 
and  the  very  letter  of  that,  great  rule  of  criminal  law  I  have  just 
adverted  to,  demands  that  no  presumption  shall  be  indulged  in 
against  the  prisoner.  That  the  burden  of  proving  his  innocence 
is  not  in  dim;  hut  that  the  whole  matter  must  be  revealed  toyour 
minds  by  the  State,  in  such  a  manner,  and  by  such  strong,  con- 
clusive, manifest  proofs,  as  to  remove  all  doubt  on  the  subject. 

Can  you  look  upon  this  scene,  and  declare  that  all  is  plain, 
clear,  and  certain  ? 
'X  Are  you  satisfied  by  the  proofs  thai  Black  commenced  thai  affray; 
by  lir-i  drawing  his  pistol?  Has  the  State  proven  that  fact  toyour 
entire  satisfaction?  Sire,  the  probabilities  are  all  the  oilier  way.  The 
law  as  to  self-defense  is  scarcely  susceptible  of  an  accurate  definition. 
Indeed,  the  law  of  self-defense  is  one  thai  is  not  and  cannot  be  defined 
in  men's  books.  It  is  written  in  men's  natures,  stamped  upon  their 
ts,  and  each  case  presents  its  own  peculiar  and  distinguishing  cir- 
sumstances,  and  depends  upon  them,  li  is  fashionable  for  prosecutions 
ti>  dwell  on  old  definitions,  as  found  in  very  early  writers  on  this  sub- 
ject, and  they  are  full  ol  expressions  about  "retreating  to  the  wall," 
and  *4  declining  the  contest,"  and  re  lined,  artificial  distinctions,  which 
are  painful  to  dissect,  and  which  profess  to  lay  down  rules  for  the 
government  .of  a  man's  conduct  and  action  in  moments  of  extremity 
and  peril,  v.  li  u,  to  pause  and  recall  to  m'md  such  artificial,  technical 
rule-,  would  be  set  down  by  the  world  as  mere  sheer  idiocy  itself. 

Gentlemen  of  the  jury,  when  these  rules,  these  absurdities  about 
declining  contests  and  retreating  to  walls  prevailed,  they  were 
founded  oil  a  \  iew  of  the  relations  of  man  to  government  and  society, 
ly  different  from  those  prevailing  now.  They  are  the  offspring  of 
that  sentiment  which  made  society  and  government  everything  and 
man  nothing.  When  the  Life  of  a  human  beiug  was  regarded  as  the 
property  of  the  government,  and  when  the  slightest  infraction  of  the 
police  regulations  of  society  was  esteemed  the  mosl  grievous  offense. 
When  men  w,-re  called  on  and  compelled  to  sacrifice  everythiug, 
properly,  honor,  lite  itself,  for  society  ami  government .  When  society 
was  supreme  and  the  individual  nothing,  when  man  was  regarded  as 
existing  only  for  governmenl;.  Hence  it  was  thai  the  government 
would  not  excuse  a  homicide,  unless  the  slayer  had  retreated  to  walls. 
because  its  police  regulations  were  considered  higher,  more  sacred  and 
holy  than  the  (:     5  oJ  the  peopl  ■.     But  when  a  truer  and  sounder  view 


■V 


106  TRIAL   OF   HARBY   CRAWFORD   BLACK 

on  this  s«bj<  cl  began  to  prevail,  when  man's  relations  to  society  and 
government  became  emancipated  from  the  doctrines  and  sentiments 
thai  dwai'fed  his  individuality  and  dwindled  aim  into  nothing  beside 
the  State,  when  men  and  judges  began  to  learn  something  of  their 
own  personal  importance  and  feel  the  promptings  of  thai  individuality 
which  asserts  its  ov>  a  dignity  and  importance,  when  it. began  to  dawn 
that  government  was  created  for  man  and  not-anaci  for  government, 
then  these  old,  <lry,  technical  rules  began  to  give  way,  and  to-day  the 
doctrine  i-  this  :  That  if  the  slayer  had  reasonable  cause  to  apprehend* 
and  did  apprehend  da-tiger  to  his  life,  or  even  greal  bodily  harm,  the 
homicide  is-excusable.  That  is  the  law  prevailing  all  over  this  country. 
[t  has  found  expression  in  various  other  forms,  but  the  whole  subject 
will  be  found  to  resolve  itself  into  precisely  that  statement. 

(Mr.  Syesterthen,  in  support  of  his  proposition,  read  from  Wharton 
on  Homicide,  pages  '22s,  229,  and  2U;;.  Also  from  Judge  Parkins' 
charge  in  Selfridge's  case.) 

-Much,  indeed  1  may  safely  say  everything-,  depends  on  appearances, 
more  especially  when  those  appearances  arc  created  by  the  party 
killed. 

Gentlemen,  adopting  the  language  of  an  eminent  judge  in  Pennsyl- 
vania, in  delivering  the  opinion  of  the  Court  in  one  of  the  eases  I  have 
adverted  to,  '•  Look  you  into  the  heart  of  the  defendant  at  the  time  of 
the  transaction  ;  search  out  his  motives,  *  *  and  say  whether,  con- 
stituted as  nature  made  him,  he  had  reason  to  believe,  and  did  believe, 
v  that  he  was  in  serious  danger."  Go  with  this  prisoner,  as  he  went  to 
his  humble,  ruined  home  that  Sunday  night,  with  his  heavy  load  Of 
shame  and  bitterness  on  his.  heart;  Btaywith  him  as  he  wrestled  all 
night  long  with  the  hideous  beliefs  that  were  ever  present  in  all  their 
deformity  before  his  mind,  and,  as  morning  dawned,  wearied,  wasted* 
and  prostrate,  with  the  presence  of  a  bereavement  too  fearful  for  de- 
scription, he  nestles  in  his  misery  and  wretchedness  close  to  the  faith- 
ful and  now  bleeding  bosom  of  her  who  bore  him  to  the  world,  and 
there  fell  into  the  short  and  troubled  slumber,  from  which  he  was  so 
soon,  summoned  to  the  contemplation  of  a  woe  too  bitter,  too  terrible 
for  description.  And  let  me  ask  you  what  impressions  doyou  suppose, 
respecting  the  sentiments,  dispositions,  and  temper  of  McKaig  toward 
him  must  have  been  uppermost  in  his  mind.  To  his  apprehension,  to 
his  belief,  everything  that  made  life  valuable  had  been  destroyed.  His, 
very  name  had  passed  into  a  by-word  of  reproach  and  infamy;  the 
honor  and  peace  of  his  home  and  parents  were  gone,  and  the  author  of 
all  this  woe,  this  indescribable  wretchedness,  had  wantonly  insulted 
and  manifestly  attempted  to  force  him  into  a  bloody  and  deadly  conflict, 
I  doubt  not  but  at  that  moment  the  scene  at  Ferguson's  came  back 
upon  his  mind  with  a  force,  significance,  and  emphasis  never  before 
apprehended.  I  doubt  not  that  the  communication  made  to  him  by 
Long  the  evening  before  revealed  to  his  distracted  apprehension  a 
malignity  and  a  .settled  purpose  to  draw  him  into  a  deadly  issue,  far 
more  clearly  than  you  or  I,  not  actors  in  the  drama,  can  possibly  con- 
ceive of.  Conditioned  as  he  was.  these  circumstances  reappeared  to 
his  mind  with  ten-fold  power,  and  clothed  with  a,  hundred-fold  more 
meaning  than  they  did  when  in  a  calmer  state.  'They  became  known 
to  the  prisoner,  and  yon  .see  the  prisoner,  with  all  these  beliefs  and  all 
these  impressions  on  his  mind,  confronted  by  the  man  who  was  the 


FOR    KILLING   COLONEL    W.    W.    m'KAIG,    JE.  L07 

author  of  them  &\l.  Ton  find  that  man  leaving  his  side  of  the  stre<  I , 
and  before  he  met  him  changing  his  eane  from  his  right  to  his  left 
hand,  and  with  that  right  hand  reaching  back  where  his  pistol  was ; 
the  same  man  who  had  purposely  and  wantonly  insulted  liim  before, 
who  had  stood  and  waited  and  watched  for  him,  who  had  destroyed 
all  the  green  places  in  his  memory,  dried  up  everysource  of  enjoyment, 
and  laid  tears,  misery,  and  distraction  on  his  hearthstone.  Yousee 
that  man  just  in  iron  i  of  the  prisoner^  the  man  thai  he  then  was  to  the 
prisoner,  full  ofhostile,  deadly  intents,  and  in  the  face  of  all  this  wc 
arc  told  the  prisoner  should  have  wailed  for  more.  There  was  not 
enough,  to  Ins  apprehension,  to  have  generated  a  reasonable  belief  of 
serious  bodily  harm,  or  death  itself,  why,  gentlemen,  in  a  ease  like 
this,  can  there  be  doubt  as  to  what  induced  the  prisoner  to  fire?  if 
there  is  a  doubt  on  that  subject,  by  the  great,  indesl  ructible,  and  over- 
shadowing principle  of  the  common  law,  yon  are  bound  by  your  oaths 
to  give  the  benefit  of  the  doubl  to  the  prisoner.  But,  be  assured,  gen- 
tlemen, that  no  common  circumstance  suddenly  transformed  that  quiet, 
peaceful,  and  gentle  disposition  into  a  death-dealing  minister.  \  > 
common  passion  swept  thai  bosom,  which  had  always  hern  Hie  abode 
of  peaceand  order.  No  ordinary  apprehension  overwhelmed  that  will 
which,  from  early  childhood  and  amid  the  most  trying  scenes,  had 
ever  cherished  the  sentiments  of  amiability  and  gentleness,  and  had 
shunned  every  temptation  to  violence  and  disorder.  If  you  are  left, 
in  doubt,  either  from  the  want  of  direct  or  the  force  of  circumstantial 
evidence  as  to  the  origin  of  that  deadly  encounter^  let  the  history  of 
the  prisoner's  life,  let  the  gilded  volume  of  his  character,  let  the  liv- 
ing memories  of  his  life  and  its  attributes,  let  these  resolve  that  doubt. 
If  ymi  must  receive  more  satisfactory  evidence  upon  that  which  the 
Stale  must  not  leave  in  doubt,  if  you  must  have  assurances  on  a  point 
to  which  the  state  and  the  State  alone  must,  respond,  with  clear,  mani- 
fest proofs,  if  you  will  go  beyond  the  strict  and  solemn  injunctions  of 
the  law,  and  overleap  those  broad,  deep  harriers,  erected  for  thepro- 
tection  of  our  lives  and  liberty,  and  will  explore  the  forbidden  fields  of 
inquiry,  if  you  will  have  it  that,  by  some  means,  this  doubtful  matter 
must  he  cleared  up,  if  the  State  shall  demand  of  us  that  wc  shall  make 
clear  what  lias  been  left  in  obscurity,  gentlemen  of  the  jury  we  do  not, 
we  will  not,  shrink  from  theissue,  although  the  law,  of  which  you  are 
the  sworn  administrators,  does  not  demand  it  at  our  hands.  And.  in 
response  to  such  a  demand,  we  pointyou  to  the  dispositions  mauif 
by  the  deceased  toward  the  prisoner.  We  point  you  to  a.  character  on 
the  part  of  the  prisoner  the  like  of  which  has  never  before  been  un- 
folded to  the  admiration  of  a  jury.  We  point  to  all  these  evi- 
dences, and.  by  their  imposing  and  substantial  power,  we  confidently 
await  a  triumphant  solution  of  that,  which  we  arc  not  called  on  by  any 
law  to  solve. 

[  am  aware  that  out  friends  assume  to  get  overall  this  byreferring 
you  to  the  prisoner's  repeated  shots  and  to  his  declarations  when  that 
bloody  scene  was  shrouded  in  death,  lint  who  shall  assume  to  meas- 
ure the  distance  a  man  shall  go  when  moved  by  emotions  and  b: 
such  as  were  sweeping  the  prisoner  along  when  that  encounter  tools 
place  f  Who  shall  assume  to  say  now,  when  the  whole  scene  is  calmly 
and  dispationately  reviewed,  and,  piece  by  piece,  unfolded  »o  us,  who 
shall  assume  to  say  bow  many  shots  ought  to  lane  been  fired  and  when 


108  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CKAWFOB©    RLACK 

the  prisoner  should  have  stopped?  With  the  beliefs  that  were  upon 
his  mind,  with  the  appearances  that  were  before  his  face,  he  could  uot, 
and  did  nol  stop  while  his  adversary  was  <>u  his  feet. 

Remember,  genl  lemen,  we  have  all  beeu  here  for  near  teu  days,  in- 
quiring into  matters  that  were  crowded  up  into  nol  more  than  twenty 
seconds;  and  it  is  preposterous  to  attempt  to  point  out  now  what 
might  orcould  have  been^len  or  known  by  the  prisoner,  or  to  what 
conclusion  he  should  have  come  when  the  interests  and  investigations 
ofdays  wereall  crowded  up  into  an  instant  of  time.  Why,  gentlemen, 
do  our  friends  for  the  prosecution  expect  thai  the  prisoner,  or  any 
other  person  even  witnessing  that  transaction,  nol  participating  in  ir, 
to  have  been  so  calm  and  capable  of  reviewing  the  different  stages  oi 
that  affair  as  they,  or  you.  or  I  am  now?  Have  they  forgotten,  and 
can  you  forget  all  that  must  at  that  moment  have  been  crowding  and 
thronging  the  mind  and  memory  and  stirring  the  emotions  of  the 
prisoner?  Can  you  believe  that  the  overwhelming  sense  of  wrong, 
injustice,  and  outrage,  which  had  stunned  him  and  roused  all  the  deep- 
est feelings  of  his  soul!  left  any  place  in  his  mind  tor  deliberation, 
calmness,  or  composure  ? 

Is  it  at  all  likely,  alter  all  he  had  heard  and  seen  and  felt,  and  in  the 
presence  of  what  was  loo  manifestly  before  him.  lie  was  capable  of 
nidging  as  you  and  I  now  may  judge,  and  coming  to  the  same  con- 
clusions the  gentlemen  prosecuting  have  come  to? 

Only  consider  this  matter  for  a  moment.  You  are,  all  of  you,  men 
of  respectability,  and  know  the  value  of  an  untarnished  name,  and  a 
pare  and  virtuous  household;  Suppose  there  should  suddenlyhe  un- 
folded to  you  the  story  of  the  ruin  of  your  home,  the  dishonor  of  your 
name,  the  infamy  of  your  wife,  or  sister,  ordaughter,  how  calm,  how 
composed  would  you  hey  That  would  he  revealing  to  you  a  sense  of 
wrong,  a  situation  of  calamity,  more  unsupportable  than  if  you  had 
lost  every  dollar  you  ever  possessed'. 

Gentlemen  of  the  jury,  when  the  very  jewels  of  our  names  and 
household  are  prostit  uted  into  the  mere  toy.  to  minister  to  the  depraved 
lusts  of  other.-;  when  the  wife,  daughter,  or  sister  has  been  dragged 
from  her  character  and  virtue  down  to  shame  and  dishonqr;  when  ail 
Society  can  point  the  slow-moving  finger  of  its  scorn  at  the  home  that 
was  once  the  abode  of  purity  and  virtue;  when  our  homes  shall  be 
.shunned  by  the  pure  and  blameless  in  life,  and  he  converted  into  the 
Verystys  of  infamy,  and  there  shall  remain  nothing  of  them,  save  the 
crushiiigfaCt  that  all  which  gave  them  their  charm  and  delight,  are 
gone,  and  gone  forever;  oh!  when  such  a  doom  shall  overtake  our 
homes,  and  blacken  anil  desolate  our  hearthstones — then,  then  will  it 
he  that  we  can  realize,  in  all  its  power,  the  hideous  deformity  of  a 
woe  that,  in  spite  of  habit;  education,  and  prayer,  shall  turn  our 
sweetest  thoughts  to  bitterness,  and  our  best-ordered  purposes  to  mad- 
ness ! 

it  was  from  the  contemplation  of  such  a  scene,  of  which  language 
can  give  hut  a  faint  outline,  that  my  client  had  just  turned — aye! 
its  hitter  waters  were  upon  him,  when  he  was  encountered  that 
morning  by  the  deceased.  That  he  had  passed  that  long,  sleepless 
night  of  misery  in  distraction,  none  can  doubt.  And  he  was  still 
treading  those  dizzy,  narrow  heights,  to  which  he  had  been  swept  by 
the  storm  of  the  most  fearful  of  all  calamities,  and  from  which  even  to 


FOE    KILLING    COLONEL   W.    W.    m'kAIQ,   JR.  109 

look  was  madness  !  No  !  no  !  be  did  not,  li"  could  nol  stay  bis  hand, 
while  there  remained  the  slightest  chance  that  his  adversary,  and  the 
enemy  of  all  that  was  true  and  lovely  to  him.  might  have  power 
to  execute  the  deadly  purpose  he  had  so  persistently,  so  fatally 
sought. 

Our  learned  brothers  affeel  to  draw  unfavorable  conclusions  from 
the  expression  used  by  the  prisoner  after  the  body  of  McKaig  lay  dead 
in  the  street,  [f  such  conclusions  had  been  fair  and  legitimate,  do 
you  believe  this  prosecution  would  have  struggled  as  it  did  against  the 
admission  of  those  expressions  in  evidence  before  you?  You  will  re- 
member that  when  I  asked  Dr.  Healey,  on  cross-examination,  to 
declare  all  that  was  said,  as  well  as  all  that  was  done,  by  (lie  prisoner 
on  that  occasion*  we  had  a  lone,-  discussion  before  the  Court  as  to 
whether  any  declarations  by  the  prisoner  were  admissible,  And  now, 
after  having  warred  against  this  as  evidence,  our  learned  friends  take. 
it  up  as  one  of  the  very  props  of  the  prosecution.  "Well  did  these 
gentlemen  understand  the  force  and  power  of  that  expression  :  "Now 
you  will  seduce  another  sister  of  mine  I."  tk  I  have  killed  the  man  who 
ruined  my  sister."' 

Gentlemen  of  the  jury,  may  heaven,  in  its  great  mercy,  spare  you 
and  [,  and  Olirs,  the  bitterness  of  such  an  expression.  1  have  seen 
my  children  cold  and  shrouded  in  death.  I  have  stood  by  their  open, 
their  early  graves,  and  have  felt  all  the  bitterness  and  desolation  of 
bereavements^  which  I  thought  too  hard  to  bear,  and  iu  my  anguish 
and  wretchedness  have  almost  questioned  the  mercy  and  providence  of 
heaven  itself  in  thus  overwhelming  me  with  the  waters  of  bitterness 
ami  woe.  But  1  can  say,  in  all  truth  and  candor,  that  I  would  wel- 
come them  to  their  graves,  rather  than  behold  them  before  me  infa- 
mous, ruined,  dishonored, aud  degraded,  as  this  wretched  prisoner  felt. 
and  knew  her  to  be,  ^ho,  up  to  that  hour,  had  been  to  him  all  that 
was  pure  and  blameless  in  life.  That  the  sense  of  that  calamity  was 
uppermost  in  his  mind,  and  deepest  and  strongest  in  his  heart,  no  one 
can  doubt  ;  and  it,  is  not  to  be  wondered  at.  that  when  death  had  set- 
tled <>n  tli"  overwhelming  excitement  of  that  transaction,  the  remem- 
brance of  a  ruined  home  and  a  dishonored  sister  should  have  risen  up 
and  to  his  mind  presented  itself  as  all  sufficient  as  a  justification  for 
what    he  had  done. 

Gentlemen,  i  can  conceive  of  nothing  in  life  more  calculated  to  ex- 
cite passion.  Certainly,  there  is  no  disaster,  no  misfortunein  life  so 
utterly  irrel  rievaWe  ;  no  sorrow  so  crushing  ;  no  spectacle  so  madden- 
ning  as  that  which  unfolded  itself  to  the  mind  of  my  client.  It  is  ab- 
solutely impossible  to  contemplate  the  bare  possibility  of  such  a 
calamity  With  composure.  Our  minds  grow  wild  and  feverish  at  the 
hare  thought.  The  purposes  become  unsettled  at  the  most  remote 
prospect  of  a  bereavement  so  fearful  and  harrowing  as  that.  The  wilt 
shakes  in  its  citadel,  and  order  and  reason  totter  in  their  strongholds 
at  the  bare  mention  of  a  destruction  so  fearful  in  its  desolation,  so  in- 
curable in  its  woe  ! 

The  learned  gentlemen  for  the  State  have  read  law  to  you,  to  the 
ctleei  that  there  are  circumstances  and  occasions  when,  on  account  of 
the  heat  of  Wood,  the  law  steps  in  and  reduces  the  grade  of  killing. 
But  we  arc  told  that  the  law  takes  no  account  of  the   hot  blood  pro- 


110  TRIAL    OF    HARRY   CRAWFORD    BLACK 

dueed  by  a  trespass  like  thai  to  which  tin-  prisoner  felt  himself  sub- 
jected, a  trespass  on  the  finest,  the  noblest,  and  the  holiest  affections 
of  the  human  heart — the  sister  whose  purity  you  have  enshrined  as  a 
pure  and  spotless  image  in  your  heart,  on  whose  Love  and  devotion 
you  have  reposed  from  childhood  to  manhood — she  may  be  snatched 
from  her  innocent  grace;  dishonored  before  your  face;  betrayed, 
wronged,  set  adrif!  on  the  wild  and  tossing  sea  of  abandoned  and  riot- 
ous  passion  ;  shunned,  scoffed  at  and  jeered  at  by  the  veriest  outcast. 
that  prowl-  the  streets;  and  you  are  gravely  told  that  these  laws  we 
live  under  make  no  accounl  of  the  stirring  of  blood  that  such  a  spectacle, 
such  a  t  respass  upon  all  your  love  and  affection  produce-  \  But  if  two 
inen  fall  into  a  drunken  brawl,  and  low  and  violent  passions  are 
aroused  bv  a  blowj  the  law,  in  tender  consideration  for  the  hot  blood, 
heated  by  brutal,  vulgar  habits  and  low  indulgences,  considers  that  the 
death  that  ensued  from  such  a  scene  is  not  murder,  but  manslaughter. 
But  when  the  blood  is  heated  by  arousing  emotion-,  and  inflaming 
into  passion  feelings  and  sentiments  that  have  their  seat  and  origin  in 
the  ptirest  and  best  affections  of  our  common  nature,  and  under  such 
impulses  a  deed  of  disorder  or  death  ensues,  these  prosecutors  tell  us 
the  jury  must  take  no  accountofall  that.  You  are  walking  the  street, 
and  a  man  purposely  jostles  you  there,  (and  this  is  one  of  the  very  ex- 
amples read  by  the  prosecutors  from  122d  sec.  of  3d  Greet  deaf.)  and  in 
the  heal  oi  blood  thus  wantonly  provoked,  you  slay  the  jostler  ;  the 
law  spares  your  life.  But  that  same  man  might  have  entered  your 
household,  in  all  the  confidence  of  intimate  friendship,  and  there  ruined 
your  peace  and  the  peace  of  your  whole  family,  and  destroyed  every- 
thing that  was  lovely  and  lovable  about  it ;  and  if,  under  the  impulses 
of  a  woe,  too  unutterable  for  human  lips,  you  had  destroyed  the  au- 
thor of  a  misery  like  that,  you  would  be  met  with  a  legal  presumption, 
to  wit,  that  you  was  all  the  while  perfectly  calm,  absolutely  composed, 
and  entirely  capable  of  forming  deadly,  deliberate,  and  malicious  pur- 
poses. A  man  may  strike  and  scar  your  face  with  an  unprovoked 
blow,  and  you  kill  him  on  the;  spot;  but  you  are  not  guilty  of  murder, 
because  these  law-books  tell  us  of  a  weakness  of  the  human  heart  of 
which  the  law  is  tender,  •'  very  tender,"  so  that  no  malice  will  be  pre- 
sumed, and  the  hot  blood  provoked  by  the  blow  reduces  the  grade  of 
your  o  lie  use.  But  that  same  man  may  scar  your  name  with  shame; 
be  may  strike  a  blow  into  your  quivering  heart  that  shall  open  up  a 
stream  of  agonyso  bitter,  so  exhaustless,  that  no  time,  no  consolations 
can  heal  it ;  and  if,  under  the  impulses  thus  wantonly  engendered, 
you  kill  the  author  of  a  desolation  like  that,  we  are  told  that  the  law 
makes  no  account  of  the  emotions  and  passions  that  blinded  reason 
and  subverted  judgment,  dethroned  calmness,  and  held  the  will  in 
thraldom.  A  man  assails  you  along  the  road,  and  attempts  to  rob  you 
of  a  fifty-cent  government  note,  and  if,  in  defending  yourself  from 
such  an  assault  as  that,  you  kill  the  assailant;  that  is  justifiable  homi- 
cide, because  it  was  in  defense  of  your  property.  But  we  all  stand 
here  with  our  wives,  daughters,  and  sisters — these  priceless  jewels  of 
our  hearts — all  exposed  ;  the  practiced  hand  of  any  gilded  seducer  may 
snatch  them  from  our  bosoms,  tarnish  and  degrade  them,  and  then,  with 
scorn  and  derision,  throw  them  back  upon  us;  and  these  laws,  we  are 
told,  declare  all  that  nothing — nothing  tluit  you  have  drained  to  its 


FOR  KILLING  COLONEL  W.  W.  m'kAIG,  JR.      Ill 

last  dregs  the  bitterestcup  that  misfortune,  injury,  and  outrage  ever 
presented  to  unwilling  lips. 

Gentlemen,  let  us  clasp  hands  just  here,  and  if  it  is  true  thai  these 
lawsofours  ignore  the  truest  instincts  of  our  hearts,  and  banish  the 
purest,  dearest,  and  most  cherished  affections  of  our  natures,  let  as 
trust  our  Jives  and  souls  to  the  mercy  of  a  just  God,  rather  Hum  be 
subject  to  such  calamities.  Let  our  graves*sbe  dug  for  us  all  overthe 
land,  and  let  the  destroyers  of  our  homes  live  surrounded  by  the  hon- 
ors and  sustained  by  the  honied  commendations  of  a  society  that  can 
tolerate  principles  of  law  like  those  I  have  but  imperfectly  described. 
It  is  a  line  thiug  to  talk  about  the  peace,  government,  and  dignity  of 
society,  and  quite  fashionable  (o  indulge  in  discourses  about  the  order, 
the  law,  and  well-being  of  the  people;  but  believe  me,  neither  the 
peace  of  the  people,  nor  the  dignity  of  the  State,  nor  the  order  or 
honor  of  society  can  be  preserved  under  the  administration  of  laws 
like  these.  What  respect!  what  reverence!  whathonor!  can  a  people 
entertain  for  a  State  orsoeiefy  which  casts  the  garments  of  wretched- 
ness on  tlx-  wronged,  ruined,  and  Let  rayed,  and  leaves  them  to  dead  in 
loneliness  and  desertion  witli  their  sorrows,  and  at  the  same  time 
opens  all  it  s  saloons  of  refinement,  all  its  resorts  of  fashion,  and  all  its 
posts  of  honor  to  those  whose  robes  are  stained  with  transgressions, 
and  whose  hands  are  hardened  with  the  ruins  they  have  wrought  on 
the  weak  and  unprotected. 

Let  no  man  take  his  stand  amid  the  ruins  of  the  first,  the  highest, 
and  holiest  laws  of  human  nature,  and  preach  to  US  about  the  broken 
statutes  of  society  and  the  violated  sanctions  of  law. 

Gentlemen,  there  are  laws  other  that  those  written  in  these  hooks, ' 
judgments  oilier  than  those  found  in  the  precedents  of  courts.  There 
are  laws,  principles,  and  sentiments  as  imperishable  and  indestruct- ! 
ible  as  human  nature  itself,  and  which  no  system  of  jurisprudence 
can  safely  assume  to  undervalue,  and  which  none  has  ever  yet  been 
able  to  ignore.  There  a.re  laws  graven  on  the  human  heart,  by  a 
mightier  finger  than  ever  traced  the  letters  of  your  statutes,  and  im- 
posed by  a  diviner  sanction  than  ever  fell  from  human  lips;  and  these 
laws  must  he  vindicated  and  preserved  at  every  hazard,  for  society 
cannot  exist  one  hour  without  them.  The  laws  I  am  speaking  of  are 
those  which  are  rooted  and  grounded  in  the  purest  and  best  affections 
of  our  natures,  which  bloom  and  blossom  under  the  sacred  influences 
of  our  homes  ;  which,  starting  amid  the  loves  and  purity  of  the  family 
circle,  broaden  and  deepen  into  love  of  neighborhood,  and  growing 
•with  our  growth,  and  expanding  with  our  experiences,  ripen  into  love 
of  country. 

1  know  that  the  early  law,  framed  by  the  Norman  conquerors  of 
England,  utterly  ignored  all  the  domestic  affections,  ami  all  the  sanc- 
tities and  sublimities  of  our  common  nature.  1  know  that  these  senti- 
ments i  am  speaking  of  found  no  place,  no  recognition  whatever  in 
a.  system  of  jurisprudence  that  was  founded  on  considerations  of  pro- 
perty alone.  They  were  all  excluded  by  the  spirit  of  an  age  and  the 
power  of  a  race  of  conquerors  who  themselves  appropriated  the  most, 
sacred  relations  oflife  to  the  gratification  of  rapacity  and  lust.  There 
was,  under  the  laws  set  up  by  the  Norman  conquerors  of  England,  no 
law,  no  punishment  for  the  destrovers  of  families.    Those  iawswere 


112  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

molded  by  the  oppressors  of  the  people,  the  conquering  lords  and 
proud,  overbearing  barons  of  the  manor,  who  rioted  in  ravishment 
and  the  destruction  of  homes,  and  whose  ill-gotten  and  bloated  estates 
enabled  them  to  pay,  without  feeling  it.  the  slight  pecuniary  fines  im- 
posed as  ;i  penalty  for  violating  and  destroying  the  happiness  and  the 
honor  of  the  people.  Indeed,  one  caunot  i  urn,  withoul  a  shudder,  to 
those  pages  of  the  old  law  e  of  Eugland,  where  the  domestic  loves  and 
natural  affections,  the  sacred  beatings  and  outbreathings  of  the  heart 
are  brought  into  contact  with  the  law.  But,  after  long  years  of  strug- 
gle and  conflict,  these  relations  and  affections,  and  pure  and  honored 
sentiments  have  been  emancipated  from  the  thraldom  imposed  upon 
them — they  are  beginning  to  take  up  their  proper  position  among 
those  great  interests  and  substantia]  considerations  on  which  society 
itself  rests,  and  are  receivingat  the  hands  of  an  enlightened,  moral 
judgment  that  high  raid;  and  that  imposing  station  which  their  im- 
portance entitles  them  to.  And  whatever  may  be  the  artificial  rules, 
founded  on  a  view  of  society  existing  in  the  rude  and  early  civilization 
of  England,  •when  the  criminal  code  was  Trained  to  encourage  and 
shield  the  ravishers  and  destroyers  of  homes,  and  not  to  preserve  their 
purity  and  honor  among  the  masses.  Whatever  may  be  contained  in 
the  judgments  of  the  assizes  of  an  age  when  the  husband  and  the 
father  had  no  other  remedy  for  the  ravishment  of  his  wife  or  daughter 
than  a  writ  of  replevin  to  rescue  her  from  the  lust  and  rapacity  of  some 
haughty  oppressor,  nevertheless  the  judgement  and  heart  of  any  man, 
on  whom  even  a  glimmering  of  the  civilization  of  this  age  has  ever 
rested,  will  pronounce  thecrimeof  that  man  who  invades  the  peace 
and  sanctities  of  our  homes  with  the  desolations  of  seduction  and 
shame,  to  he  the  most  heinous  that  can  slain  and  blacken  the  annals 
of  transgression.  Ami  whoever  assumes  to  ignore  these  domestic  re- 
lations and  natural  affections,  and  these  sanctities  of  our  common 
nature,  which  are  so  closely  bound  up  with  the  happiness  of  fche  people, 
the  honorand  purity  of  society,  and  peace  and  order  of  the  State,  who- 
ever, in  the  madness  of  his  passion  and  lust-  shall  darken  our  homes 
witli  thai  hideous  shadow  which  must-  rest  in  shame  and  dishonor  on 
all  that  we  most  love  and  cherish,  whoever  shall  turn  the  homes  of 
the  people  into  desolate  and  waste  places,  dry  up  all  fountains  of  en- 
joyment, poison  all  sources  of  delight,  and  leave  there  nothing  hut 
maddening  memories,  and  prospects  all  blighted  and  blasted  with  mis- 
fortune, gentleman,  such  a  man  is  a  monster  more  dreadful,  more 
hideous  than  the  stealthy  assassin.  Beside  such  a  crime  murder  it- 
self may  clap  its  hands  in  t  rininph.  And  the  State,  society,  or  govern- 
ment that  can  tolerate  crimes  like  that,  or  can  shield  transgressors 
like  ihese  from  the  righteous  vengeance  of  an  insulted,  outraged,  and 
ruined  people,  only  mocks  you  when  its  representatives  puate  about 
order,  peace,  and  good-will  among  men. 

Let  no  one  dome  the  injustice  to  suppose  that  I  am  undervaluing 
the  common  law  of  the  country,  or  thai  these  remarks  are  made  in 
sympathy  with  that  wild  sentiment  which  would  set  up  the  fanatacisms 
of  partizan  strifes  in  t  he  place  of  t  he  great  principles  of  security  which 
lie  at  the  foundations  of  stable,  fixed  law.  Do  not  impute  to  me  a  dis- 
position to  withdraw  this  subject  from  the  imposing  sanctions  of  the 
common  law  of  Maryland  ami  set  it  up  in  the  light  of  those  passionate 


FOR    KILLING   COLONEL    W\    W-.    m'kAIG,   JR.  Ho 

excitements  which  are  in  conflict  with  all  peace,  and  at  open  war  with 
all  order  among  men. 

I  have  presented  these  thoughts  lor  the  purpose  of  exhibiting,  to  you 
the  harmony  that  always  must  prevail  between  the  written  laws  of  a 
people  and  the  living,  glowing,  and  indestructible  laws  of  their  nature, 
not  their  passions  which  deprave,  but  those  great,  universal,  and  hon- 
ored principles  winch  elevate  and  ennoble  the  race.  And  I  say  that 
this  harmony  docs  prevail,  that  the  common  law  does  not  ignore  these 
principles,  but  takes  them  up  and  incorporates  them  into  its  own  being. 
For  this  thing,  called  the'1  common  law,"  is  not  a  cold,  dead  stony 
incrustation,  cramping,  and  deforming  all  the  developments  of  life, 
and  holding  humanity  to  the  condition  in  which  it  existed  centuries 
ago.  Treating  mankind  as  endowed  with  no  law  of  development,  and 
making  no  room  for  such  development.  But  the  common  law  is  itself 
a  living  organism,  which  expands  with  the  developments  of  society, 
keeps  pace  with  its  progress,  and  which,  while  it  looks  with  no  favor 
on  innovations  and  change,  nevertheless  takes  up  and  appropriates 
to  its  own  life  whatever  experience,  reason,  and  practice  shall  demon- 
strate to  be  true  and  good,  politic  and  just. 

I  know  that  there  is  a  sentiment,  which  supposes  itself  to  be  seated 
high  in  authority,  and  which  assumes  that  it,  and  it  alone  holds  the 
peace  of  society  and  the  order  of  State  in  its  own  hands  ;  a  sentiment 
which,  ever  and  anon,  assumes  to  step  down  from  its  lofty  place  and 
utter  a  dignified  protest  against  what  it  is  pleased  to  denominate  prin- 
ciples destructive  of  society,  and  subversive  Of  the  peace  of  the  State. 
A  sentiment  which  flatters  itself  that  it  is  doing  high  service  when  it 
can  repress  disorder  among  men,  but  never  heeds  the  costly  sacrifices 
tliatsmoke  and  bleed  on  its  altars;  and  I  know  that  this  sentiment 
will  turn  away  with  derision,  and  a  sneer  from  the  thoughts  I 
am  feebly  uttering,  because  in  its  pride  and  self-sufficiency  it 
will  pronounce  them  pregnant  with  mischief  and  full  of  social 
discord. 

But,  gentlemen,  when  the  day  shall  come,  in  which  a  spectacle  like 
that  which  unfolded  its  shame  and  horror  to  the  mind  of  Crawford 
Black,  on  the  day  he  was  told  of  his  sister's  ruin,  shall  be  contem- 
plated by  the  American  people  With  no  other  emotions  than  those  of 
ordinary  regret;  when  the  day  shall  come  in  which  the  faith,  virtue, 
and  purity  of  our  wives,  sisters,  and  daughters  shall  be  but  the  wares 
with  which  licentiousness  and  depraved  lusts  shall  trade  and  traffic; 
and  the  very  names  we  bear  shall  be  but  the  by-words  of  scolling 
libertines;  when  our  homes,  no  longer  the  abodes  of  virtue,  where 
character  is  molded  into  beauty  .-hall  become  the  lurking  places  where 
depravity  and  sin  and  shame  shall  hold  their  stealthy  carnivals,  in  a 
word,  when  their  lofty  breathings  of  thought  and  sentiment,  which 
yet  enfold  and  panoply  the  honor  of  our  familiies  shall  be  broken 
down,  and  wild  and  riotous  pas-ion  shall  rash  in  where  purity  and 
beauty  of  character  dwells,  then  will  there  be  opened  upon  us  all  the 
floodgates  of  a  ruin  ami  desolation  broadcast,  dire,  and  inevitable. 
Let  me  hear  no  more  about  principles,  subver-ive  of  society,  and 
doctrines  that  uproot  its  order  and  peace  or  impair  the  dignity  of  the 
Slate  of  Maryland.  For  after  all,  gentlemen,  who  does  not  feel  and 
know  that  tendrils  of  our  serenest  joys,  and  the  roots  of  the  peace  and 


11-dt  TRIAL    OP    HARRY    CRAWFORD   ELACK 

order  of  society,  twine  around  the  thresholds  and  warm  beneath  the 
hearthstones  of  our  Eacred  homes  ! 

And  so  long  as  these  homes  shall  present  a  quiet  and  smiling  refuge 
from  the  toils  and  cares  of  life;  so  long  as  the  purity  and  virtue  and 
beauty  of  character  of  the  wife,  the  sister,  and  daughter  shall  remain 
to  ■welcome  the  husband,  father,  brother,  and  son  to  their  cheerful  joys 
and  smiling  fireside;  so  long  as  the  kindly  charities  of  blameless  and 
loving  hearts  arc  wreathing  amid  the  hard  realities  of  outer  life,  a 
bower  of  blissful  repose;  where  the  jaded  and  weary  spirit  may 
forget  the  tossings  of  an  ever-heaving  present  in  the  holy  antici- 
pations of  a  sorrowless  and  endless  future  So  longas  the  quiet  dignity 
of  the  mother,  the  twining  tenderness  of  the  sister,  and  the  budding 
loveliness  of  the  daughter  blending  in  one  hallowed  trinity  shall  grace 
the  household  altar  and  adorn  the  household  hoard  ;  SO  long  as  these 
shall  remain  in  all  their  integrity  and  conservative  and  purifying 
power;  so  long  will  the  happiness  of  the  people  and  the  peace  and 
order  of  society  remain  as  firm  as  the  rooted  rock. 

Disappointments  and  losses  may  still  occur;  but  when  the  pride  and 
heritage,  of  the  heart  are  laid  upon  the  family  altar  the  evils  of  the 
outer  world  are  less  heavily  felt,  because  th^y  leave  untouched  the 
greater  and  richer  interest.  The  sorrows  of  death  may  shroud  all 
life's  scenes  with  gloom,  and  dash  all  its  cups  with  bitterness;  but 
while  there  shall  remain  to  us  the  precious  memories  of  the  pure  and 
blameless  lives  of  those  we  loved,  but  whose  forms  arc  forever  hid,  the 
sweet  sacred  images  which  affection  loved  to  cherish  will  come  back — 

"  Apparalled  in  more  precious  habit, 
More  moving,  delicate,  and  full  of  life 
Than  when  they  lived, indeed." 

When  those  whom  we  love  die  with  their  honors  fresh  and  bright  about 
them,  they  somehow  become  omnipresent  and  immortal  to  us.  In- 
deed, death  brings  them  nearer  to  our  feelings;  raises  them  to  a 
higher  place  in  our  memories  and  affections,  and  immortalizes  our 
affections  for  them. 

Moreover,  it  is  always  in  such  seasons  of  gloom  and  sadness  that 
kindly  hearts  are  close  beside  us,  to  mingle  their  sympathies  with  our 
griefs;  and  there,  too,  will  ever  be  found  the  faith  and  consolations  of 
our  blessed  religion,  under  whose  ministrations  the  loneliest,  nakedest 
grave  becomes  a  sunlit  bank,  bright  and  empurpled  with  the  blossoms 
of  eternal  life. 

"The  Lord  gave,  and  the  Lord  taketh  away,"  has  swept  down  to 
us  through  the  long  vistas  of  the  past,  from  the  earliest  dawn  of  re- 
corded things,  and  that  consolation  will  continue  to  abide  with  the 
stricken  and  sorrowing  until  the  last  syllable  of  recorded  time.  But 
what  consolation  can  sooth  the  heart  that  writhes  under  the  sting  of  a 
home  poisoned  with  shame  and  infamy  !  If  death  immortalizes  our 
affections  for  those  we  love,  infamy  annihilates  them. 

If  the  prisoner  had  been  told  that  his  sister  had  died,  the.  loss,  though 
bitter,  would  not  have  been  baleful,  not  deadly,  for  though  cut  off 
from  the  object  of  his  love  and  trust,  he  would  still  have  retained  those 
sentiments  for  her  in  all  their  strength  and  beauty.     It  was  not  with 


FOR   KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    MIvAIG,   JR.  115 

his  sister,  but  with  his  firith  in  her  that  he  was  forced  to  part;  it 

was  not   herself,  but  her  honor  and  name  that  was  dead  forever  to 
him  ! 

Upon  such  a  nature  as  his,  the  sadness  of  a  bereavement  like  that 
settles  into  the  deep,  dark  gloom  of  a  wounded  spirit,  and  life  will  be 
almost  a  burden  to  be  borne,  nut  a  blessing  to  be  cherished.  The 
dawn  of  life  is  around  him  in  all  its  freshness  and  beauty;  hut  its 
morning  hymns,  and  the  sweet  strains  that  charm  away  so  many  of 
its  sorrows  are  all  silent — hushed  in  the  presence  of  a  bereavement  so 
sad,  so  painful,  that  its  hare  mention  is  a  blighting  torture  to  him. 
Bnt  do  not  touch  that  life  with  your  verdict,  gentlemen,  for  it  is  now 
doubly  dear  to  those  who  love  and  cherish  him  ;  the  life  of  this  anxious 
father,  who  has  sal  by  his  side,  day  by  day,  during  this  trial,  is  more 
closely  bound  up  with  his  than  ever.  And  the  same  faithful  bosom  on 
which  he  wept  away  the  transient  sorrows  of  his  childhood,  now  yearn- 
ing toward  him  with  more  than  a  mother's  love,  awaits  your  verdict  to 
enfold  him  with  its  boundless  affections,  and  administer  its  consolations 
to  this  crushing  bereavement  of  his  riper  years.  You  cannot  he  in- 
sensible .to  the  lact  that  your  verdict  is  looked  for  with  no  common 
interest. 

It  is  not  simply  that  it  will  give  life  or  death  to  this  prisoner,  and 
joy  or  sorrow  to  the  anxious  hearts  that  here  cluster  around  him  ;  but 
it  is  because  profounder  issues  than  the  life  or  death  of  any  man  are 
embarked  on  that  verdict,  and  considerations  far  more  important  than 
the  joys  or  sorrows  of  his  friends  stand  thick  and  trembling  around 
this  case.  That  verdict  will  give  us  to  know  what  estimate  a  Maryland 
jury  places  on  the  honor  and  securities  of  our  households,  and  how 
dear  they  hold  the  loves  and  affections  which  bloom  and  ripen  under 
the  roofs  of  the  unnumbered  houses  of  this  happy  land. 

There  is  not  a  home  in  all  this  broad  land  that  will  not  feel  the  rude 
touch  of  a  verdict  which  consigns  this  prisoner  to  the  grave,  startling 
into  dismay  the  joys  and  nameless  benignities  that  nestle  amid  its 
loves  and  affections. 

There  is  not  a  brother  whose  faith  and  trust  have  reposed  amid  the 
pure  delights  and  tendencies  of  a  sister's  love,  who  will  not  feel,  in  the 
death  of  this  boy,  under  this  prosecution,  that  a  frowning  shadow  has 
fallen  and  rests  between  him  and  the  purest  memories  and  most  sacred 
recollections  of  his  life. 

Your  verdiet  will  stand  a  monumental  point  in  the  history  and  re- 
collections of  this  people.  "Nor  marble,  nor  the  gilded  monuments 
of  princes"  shall  outlive  its  powerful  influences  for  good  or  evil.  It 
will  stand  the  Kving  record  of  your  memories,  and  tongues  to  be- 
that  verdict  shall  rehearse  when  all  the  breathers  of  this  world  are 
dead. 

There  can  he  no  room  in  your  finding  ior  distinctions  as  to  the  grade 
of  homicide  ;  under  that  finding  the  prisoner  must  live  or  die.  If  the 
prosecution  is  right  he  must,  die;  if  wrong  lie  must  live  and  be  free. 
The  issues  of  life  or  death  are  as  distinctly  staked  upon  your  verdict  as 
they  were  when  the  prisoner  stood  face  to  face  with  the  same  awful  issues 
on  the  morning  of  the  1 7ih  of  October,  1871.  But,  notwithstanding  the 
power  and  determination  of  this  prosecution,  l  -till  cling  to  the  nope 
that  your  verdiet  will  release  him  from  the  long  Imprisonment  he  has 


11(5  TRIAL   OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD   BLACK. 

endured,  and  restore  him  once  more  to  the  hopes  and  trusts  that  are 
embarked  upon  his  character.  And,  seeing  that  his  early  life  is  so 
clouded  widi  misfortune  and  gloom,  I  am  sure  you  will  join  with  me 
in  the  earnest  hope  that,  in  his  later  days,  when  the  evening  rays  of 
life  shall  fall  upon  him,  he  may  not  be  found  to  give  forth  the  same 
mournful  strains  that  have  so  sadly  greeted  the  early  messengers  of 
his  morning. 


Hon    D.  W.  Vocrhees 


ARGUMENT 

OF 

HON.  D.  W.  VOORHEES. 


Gentlemen  of  the  Jury,  we  have  now  reached  that  point  where 
it  becomes  my  duty  to  address  you.  In  doing  so.  1  have  but  one 
thought  and  but  one  purpose.  I  believe,  with  fixed  and  solemn 
convictions,  in  the  innocence  of  the  young  prisoner  who  is  here  by 
my  side,  and  I  shall  tiy,  while  I  stand  before  you,  to  make  manifest 
the  grounds  of  my  belief,  and  to  the  utmost  extent  of  my  humble 
powers,  to  obtain  for  them  the  consent  of  your  minds. 

Allusion  has  been  made  to  my  position  as  counsel  here.  It  is  true 
that  I  live  in  a  distant  State,  but  I  cannot  feel  that  I  am  a  stranger  to 
you.  We  are  allied  to  each  other  by  many  ties.  We  are  husbands, 
fathers,  and  brothers.  We  have  wives,  sisters,  and  daughters.  Thes  • 
vital  and  precious  domestic  relations  form  all  mankind  into  a  universal 
holy  alliance.  By  them  you  and  I  are  acquainted.  We  uuderstan  I 
each  other  by  their  promptings.  Let  us  come  close  to  each  other  in 
this  discussion.  I  can  have  no  purposes  that  ought  not  to  be  yours. 
As  a  citizen  of  this  great  country,  desirous  of  the  welfare  of  the  peo- 
ple, desirous  of  the  supremacy  of  the  laws,  I  cannot  invoke  any  result  a 
that  you  ought  not  also  to  desire.  We  are  all  wedded  to  the  public 
good.  We  do  not  want  to  destroy  the  peace  and  good  order  of  human 
Society.  None  of  us  are  interested  in  such  a  baleful  issue.  Good  or 
evil  to  you  and  yours  is  the  same  to  me  and  mine.  A  blow  al  your 
peace  and  homes  is  a  blow  at  all  the  homes  in  the  land,  and  an  assault 
upon  the  humblest  family  circle  puts  in  peril  everything  that  we  all 
hold  dear.  We  meet,  therefore,  upon  a  common  level,  and  in  a  plain 
and  simple  manner  I  expect  to  speak  to  you  in  this  spirit. 

There  is  one  consolation  that  I  have  in  rising  to  address  you  that 
presents  itself  to  my  mind  at  once.  I  have  stood  before  juries  quite 
often,  but  never  before,  in  the  whole  range  of  my  experience,  have  I 
known  a  man  arraigned  for  murder  who  produced  such  a  record  ol 
character  as  has  been  produced  here.  All  the  powerful  presumptions 
of  a  virtuous  and  well-spent  life  arise  at  the  very  opening  of  your 
deliberation-  in  favor  of  the  defendant.  By  the  light  of  the  proof  let 
us  see  who  it  La  that  we  are  trying.  You  have  your  lingers  on  his 
pulac.  You  are  measuring  his  life,  and  the  manner  of  that  life  is  all 
In  lore  yon.  He  is  young — hut  twenty-four  years  of  age.  How  much  of 
usefulness  and  manly  life  he  has  crowded  into  that  brief  space  1  If 
one  of  yom  sons  of  that  age  was  arraigned  for  a  high  crime,  how 
proud  you  would  justly  feel  if  you  could  call,  as  has  been  done  in  this 


118  TRIAL    OF   HARRY    CRAWFORD   BLA(  K 

case,  (Void  every  quarter  and  from  every  class  everybody  who  had  ever 
mot  him,  everybody  who  had  over  done  business  with  him,  and  receive 
from  them  all  one  unbroken  strain  of  commendation  and  eulogy  !  The 
aged  and  gray  who  have  known  Harry  ('raw ford  Black  from  bis 
infancy,  have  here,  in  your  presence,  praised  his  pure  and  blameless 
life.  His  young  comrades  have  spoken  of  him  as  an  example  far 
beyond  his  years.  His  fellow  prisoners  during  the  war  describe  him  as 
a  model  amidst  the  hard  and  demoralizing  scenes  of  prison  life.  'The 
dusty  miners  from  Piedmonl .  as  well  as  Members  and  Senators'  in  Con- 
gress, '•onio  here  to  bear  their  voluntary  and  affectionate  testimony  in 
Eis  favor.  Hedoesnoi  pass  this  ordeal  alone ;  he  has  the  sweet  reward 
of  virtue  in  the  presence  and  consolation  of  those  whom  his  good  con- 
duct has  attached  to  his  fortunes;  and  the  voice  of  reason,  as  we'd  as 
law,  proclaims  that  such  a  man  is  not  a  criminal.  ITc  is  not  familiar 
with  the  walks  of  vice,  where  criminals  are  made.  His  hand  and  his 
heart  are  iiw  from  the  guile  and  tlfe  practice  of  crime,  and  yet  the 
learned  gentlemen  for  the  prosecution  insist  that  he  stands  now  at  the 
foot  of  the  scaffold,  soon  to  ascened  its  desperate  heights  for  the  com- 
mission of  a  crime  without  a  parallel  in  the  eye  of  the  law.  Pure, 
innocent,  and  virtuous  up  to  this  time  !  Do  men  of  that  kind,  with- 
out just  provocation,  enact  deeds  of  bloodshed?  If  they  commit  what 
seem  to  he  violations  of  law,  are  they  not  always  upon  the  most  dread- 
ful and  imperative  causes?  It  is  this  presumption  which  gives  to 
character  its  priceless  value  when  the  motives  and  conduct  of  a  human 
being  is  under  investigation.  But  such  a  reputation  as  the  defendant 
here  produces  is  usually  the  growth  of  a  long  life  time,  and  is  seldom 
the  accompaniment  of  early  youth.  Recall  in  your  minds  at  this 
moment  the  friends  and  neighbors  by  whom  you  are  surrounded  at  home. 
The  best  and  most  reliable  are  those  of  longest  standing.  Some  you 
have  known  for  more  than  a  quarter  of  a  century.  You  have  seen 
their  heads  whiten  as  the  winters  and  summers  have  come  and  gone. 
Their  characters  are  good  and  solid.  Little  by  little,  day  by  day, 
week  by  week,  month  by  month,  they  have  built  them  up  as  firmly  as 
your  beautiful  mountains;  but  it  has  been  the  labor  of  long  years. 
IIow  much  more  should  your  hearts  lean  to  a  mere  boy,  who  has  not 
had  much  time,  and  yet  comes  into  court  with  a  character  that  the  old 
men  of  the  country  might  be  proud  to  produce.  He  has  had  but  few 
years,  but  in  them  he  has  been  so  prone  to  virtue,  so  free  from  vice,  bo 
free  from  evil  associations  that  he  has  not  a  spot  or  stain  or  blemish. 
Show  me  another  boy  in  these  bright  valleys  who  went  from  home  at 
seventeen  years  of  age,  had  an  army  experience,  always  terrible, 
tasted  the  horrors  of  the  prison-house,  came  out  untainted  in  soul  and 
body,  went  to  the  far  West  into  the  employ  as  chief  clerk  of  a  heavy 
mercantile  house,  returns  with  their  warmest  testimonials,  becomes  at 
twenty-two  the  superintendent  of  one  of  the  foremost  mining  com- 
panies of  the  Alleghanies,  winning  at  all  times  and  places  and  circum- 
stances golden  opinions,  and  nothing  but  golden  opinions,  from  all 
sorts  of  people ;  showr  me,  I  say,  another  boy  like  this  beside  me 
within  the  range  of  your  acquaintance  who  has  borne  or  can  bear  the 
mighty  tests  to  which  the  prisoner  has  been  subjected,  and  you  will 
find  him  the  cherished  object  of  universal  regard,  beloved  by  the 
fathers  and  welcomed  by  the  mothers  into  every  domestic  circle  as  a 
model  for  their  sons  and  an  associate  for  their  daughters.     Can  the 


FOR  KILLING  COLONEL  W.  W.  M'EAIG,  JR.      119 

mark  of  Cain  rest  upon  the  brow  of  such  an  one?  Tan  the  ineffaceable 
brand  of  bloody  guilt  be  there?  Such  an  assertion  is  a  perversion  of  j 
tv!l  the  laws  of  human  nature.  The  tree  shall  be  known  by  its  fruits; 
the  thorn  and  the  thistle  do  not  bear  delicious  figs,  and  a  life  of  inno- 
cence and  peace,  does  not  bloom  and  ripen  of  a  sudden  into  a  harvest 
of  atrocious  crime. 

If  avc  were  defending,  indeed,  a  criminal,  one  whose  character  we 
did  not  dare  put  in  issue,  with  blotches  and  stains  upon  him,  how  dif- 
ferent would  he  our  feelings  and  our  positions,  lint  now  we  come 
"with  all  our  hearts  clinging  closely  to  the  defendant  in  his  peril, 
believing,  earnestly  believing  in  him  and  in  his  innocence  from  the 
very  depths  of  our  souls  ;  and  we  have  no  fear.  The  weight  of  a  good 
name  is  recognized  in  the  hooks  of  law,  hut  over  and  above  all  it  is 
recognized  in  your  own  hearts.  When  the  Hebrew  children  were  cast 
into  the  furnace,  with  its  seven  fold  heat,  there  appeared  to  the  aston- 
ished gaze  of  the  Babyhnish  king  another  form,  of  celestial  aspect, 
walking  with  them  in  the  midst  of  the  flames,  and  comforting  them 
under  their  fiery  afflictions.  So  is  Crawford  Black's  good  name  this 
moment  hovering  near  him.  like  a  beneficent  angel,  to  guard,  to  bless, 
and  to  protect  ;  and  when  he  emerges  from  this  trial  his  raiment  will 
not  he  scorched  nor  have  the  smell  of  fire. 

Gentlemen,  mention  has  been  made  of  the  change  of  venue  in  this 
ease.  I  have  something,  also,  to  say  on  that  subject.  The  McKaig's 
are  a  powerful,  able,  intellectual,  and  wealthy  family.  That  family, 
with  its  numerous  connections,  represent,  I  am  told,  more  wealth  than 
any  other  live  families  in  Alleghany  county.  The  prisoner  lias  no 
means  of  his  own,  and  no  kindred  nearer  than  cousins  who  have.  He 
is  poor,  ami  so  is  his  father,  and.  except  through  distant  kindred,  he 
has  not  a  dollar  to  aid  him  ;  yet  he  was  so  strong  in  the  community 
where  the  deed  was  done,  and  his  defense  sprang  up  so  powerfully  in 
tln>  hearts  of  all.  that  the  influence  of  the  McKaig's  melted  like  a 
mountain  mist  before  the  opening  dawn.  They  dared  not  meet  this 
stripling  youth  at  their  own  homes.  They  lied  from  their  native 
heaths.  There  these  two  young  men  were  born ;  there  they  were 
raised  ;  then'  one  was  slain  ami  the  other  awaited  his  trial.  Upon  the 
side  of  one  is  numerous  kindred,  strong,  accomplished,  intellectual, 
and  full  of  life  and  power  On  the  other  is  merely  a  good  cause  and  a 
good  name;  nothing  more  ;  and  yet  what  a  scene  1  witnessed  in  Jan- 
uary last  in  the  county  of  Alleghany  !  I  never  beheld  the  like  before, 
and  hope  never  to  again.  1  saw  an  American  Stale  seeking  to  convict 
a  man  of  crime,  though  afraid  to  put  him  upon  his  trial  where  the 
alleged  crime  was  committed.  It  was  his  right,  there  to  he  tried.  My 
associate  counsel  has  read  to  you  the  constitution  of  Maryland,  with 
its  hill  of  right-.  It  is  there  declared  that  one  of  the  principal  rights 
Of  the  citizen  is  to  he  tried  where  the  facts  arise.  When  our  tore- 
fathers  alleged  the  causes  on  which  they  fought  King  George  seven 
bloody  years,  they  laid  down  as  a  marked  grievance  that  he  trans- 
ported American  citizens  beyond  the  seas  to  be  tried  for  offenses  com- 
mitted here.  It  was  one  of  the  prominent  causes  for  which  our  fathers 
bled,  for  which  Smallwood's  Maryland  regiment  charged  on  the  battle- 
fields of  the  Revolution.  They  fought  for  the  right  of  trial  where  the 
offense  was  committed ;  the  light  to  hi'  tried  by  their  peers  and  neigh- 
bors; the  right  to  be  tried  where  witnesses  are  known.     The  counsel 


120  TRIAL    OF    HARRY   CRAWFORD   BLACK 

for  tin'  prosecution  in  this  case  seek  to  invalidate  the  testimony  for  the 
defense.  ll<>w  dare  they  assail  men  in  this  community  whom  they 
were  unwilling  to  confront  in  Cumberland,  where  they  are  fully 
known  ?  Gentlemen,  they  ask  you  to  do  what  an  Alleghany  county  jury 
would  nut  do.  They  come  away  from  thai  county  and  ask  yon  to  do  a 
deed  of  horror  that  no  jury  there  would  commit.  How  stands  this  case? 
The  State  of  Maryland  says  :  "  Alleghany  COimty  acquits  the  prisoner, 
but  we  ask  Fred 'rick  county  to  convict  him."  He  has  already  one 
verdict  of  not  guilty  in  his  favor  The  State  said  Alleghany  county 
would  not  convict  him;  thereupon  a  change  of  venufe  was  taken,  it 
amounts  to  one  verdict  of  not  guilty.  It  is  a  confession  on  the  part  of 
the  prosecution  that  the  county  where  he  was  born,  where  he  was 
raised,  and  where  McKaig  was  born,  where  he  was  raised,  and  where 
he  fell,  will  not  convict  the  defendant. 

The  attorney  general  spoke  of  the  scenes  of  Colonel  MeKaig's  funeral 
in  Cumberland — that  the  stores  were  closed  and  mourners  went  about 
the  streets  as  if  a  great  public  calamity  had  befallen  the  city.  If  this 
dramatic  picture  is  true,  if  there  was  a  deep  sense  of  wrong  and  out- 
rage in  the  breasts  of  the  people  against  Black,  why  is  he  here  for 
trial?  If  stores  were  closed,  if  there  was  burning  indignation,  if  there 
was  grief  over  the  loss  of  an  unoffending  citizen,  why  are  we  not  all  In 
Cumberland,  rather  than  in  Frederick?  What  did  this  prosecution  flee 
from  ?  Why  did  it  tlee  at  all  ?  It  fled  hoping  to  hide  from  a  jury  the  t  rue 
causes  of  this  disaster.  The  public  mind  wastoofull  of  knowledge  where 
all  the  facts  were  known.  The  very  air  Was  full  ofthe  wrongs  inflictedby 
the  deceased  upon  the  defendant  and  his  family.  It  was  too  well  known 
by  the  entire  people  that  there  was  one  desolate  home,  one  ruined 
daughter,  one  frantic,  father,  one  broken-hearted  mother,  and  one  out- 
raged, insulted,  and  menaced  brother  and  son  in  their  midst.  The  wit- 
nesses by  whom  we  have  proven  McKaig's  assault  upon  Black  on  that 
fatal  morning  were,  also  too  well  known  in  that  communiiy  to  suit  the  pur- 
poses of  the  prosecution.  This  prosecution  fled  from  another  fact.  A 
jury  in  Cumberland  could  inspect  the  premises  and  examine  the 
ground  where  the  collision  took  place.  They  could  see  the  exact  posi- 
tion these  parties  bore  toward  each  other  ;  tliey  could  determine  where 
McKaig  came  from,  where  he  was,  how  he  crossed  the  street,  whether 
there  was  a  natural  crossing  there,  and  that  Black  did  not  seek  him  by 
crossing  the  street,  but  that  McKaig  sought,  him.  All  that  conld  be 
seen  by  the  jury  there,  and  all  that  we  loose  by  being  brought  here. 
This  course  upon  the  part  of  the  prosecution  is  virtually  a  nolle 
prosequi.  It  amounts  to  a  dismissal,  so  far  as  the  county  of  Alleghany, 
where,  the  trial  properly  belongs,  is  concerned.  In  my  judgment,  this 
law  that  allows  the  State  to  drag  a  prisoner  from  his  home  for  trial,  to 
transport  him  from  the  location  of  his  conduct,  is  unconstitutional,  is 
not  in  accordance  with  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  nor  (lie 
constitution  of  Maryland.  I  believe  whenever  this  question  is  raised, 
and  the  law  tested,  it  will  be  so  decided. 

But  we  come  now  to  a  close  and  patient  examination  of 
the  facts  in  detail  of  this  sad  and  dreadful  tragedy.  I  will 
ask  you  to  start  with  me  on  Saturday  evening  at  Piedmont, 
next  preceding  the  fatal  Monday  morning.  There,  to  my  mind, 
the  curtain  first  rises  bringing  the  prisoner  into  mental  cogni- 
zance of  the  deceased  on  the  subject  which  has  wrought  such  wide- 


FOR  KILLING  COLONEL  W.  W.  m'KAIG,  JR.      121 

spread  ruin.  Blackand  his  friend  Henshaw  were  together.  Henshaw, 
not  liking  to  intrude  upon  such  a  subject,  ye1  ventured  to  ask  whether 
the  father  of  the  prisoner  had  yel  been  indicted.  The  answer  was  that 
he  had  not.  "  I  thought;  he  would  have  been,"  said  Henshaw.  "  Why 
so?"  inquired  the  prisoner.  "Because,"  said  Henshaw,  "of  what 
occurred  on  the  fairground."  "  Well,"  says  the  prisoner,  "what  did 
occur  at  the  fairground?  I  have  never  been  able  to  get  the  truth  of 
that.  Father  was  not  in  a  condition  to  remember,  and  mother  will 
not  talk  to  me  about  it."  Henshaw  then  informed  him  that  the 
deceased,  Colonel  W.  W.  McKaig,  had  publicly  denounced  the  sister 
of  the  prisoner  as  a  strumpet  on  that  occasion.  These  were  the  burn- 
ing, awful  words  for  a  brother's  ear  to  hear  and  heart  to  fuel.  They 
wrung  from  his  pale  lips  one  brief  exclamation  of  agony ;  he  changed 
color  rapidly,  and  his  breast  heaved  with  strong  excitement.  He  grew 
silent,  and  with  an  ashen  face  invited  no  further  conversation,  and  Hen- 
shaw attempted  no  more.  He  disappears  from  our  view  for  that  night. 
Hia  tortures  are  not  for  us  to  fathom.  In  hours  of  darkness  and  deep- 
est woe  the  heart  has  no  confident  this  side  of  Omniscience.  How 
that  wretched  night  was  spent  there  is  no  proof  to  show,  for  it  passed 
in  solitary  despair.  The  next  day  dawns  on  him  in  Cumberland,  now 
intent  on  solving  the  painful  mystery  connected  with  his  sister.  We 
find  him  immediately  in  conversation  with  Mr.  Lowndes,  a  relative  by 
marriage,  and  a  gentleman  of  the  highest  character,  and  a  member  of 
the  legal  profession.  Was  lie  not  a  most  proper  person  of  whom  to 
make  inquiry,  and  with  whom  to  advise:''  Mr.  Lowndes  not  only  con- 
firms the  statement  of  Henshaw  in  regard  to  the  language  used  at  the 
fairground,  but  also  informs  the  prisoner  that  Colonel  McKaig  is  the 
seducer  of  his  sister.  This  is  his  first  information  as  to  the  author  of 
his  sister's  shame  and  ruin.  It  is  true  that  he  suspected  she  was  in 
trouble — she  was  absent  from  home — but  who  was  to  tell  this  young 
and  hopeful  spirit  that  the  idol  of  his  childhood  was  worse  than  dead 
to  him?  His  parents  were  silent  on  the  dreadful  theme  in  his  pres- 
ence. You  heard  the  stricken  and  sobbing  mother  on  the  witness 
stand.  With  tearful  eyes  and  voice  she  told  yon  that  the  wrongs  of 
the  sister  were  never  mentioned  to  her  brother ;  that  it  was  a  forbidden 
subject  In  the  little  circle  of  home  upon  the  occasions  of  the  prisoner's 
brief  visits  from  the  mines  in  the  mountains,  it  was  kept,  as  faras 
possible,  a  sealed  hook  to  him  ;  nor  is  this  any  new  phase  in  domestic 
life,  or  in  family  histories.  How  often  do  we  read  of  one  portrait?  with 
its  face  to  the  wall  and  its  name  never  mentioned.  It  is,  perhaps,  the 
image  of  one  who,  though  deeply  loved,  lias  planted  sorrow  and  shame 
in  the   hearts  of  the  household.     The   name    i-    lobe    spoken  no  more 

forever.  We  can  speak  with  a  saddened  pleasure  of  the  dead  who 
sice])  iii  purity  and  honor.  The  memory  of  their  virtues  fills  our 
hearts  with  love  and  peace,  and  we  train  white  roses  to  bloom  OD  their 
graves.  But  for  one  on  whom  a  blight  has  lallen,  beside  which  the 
touch  of  death  i-  merciful,  we  invoke  a  deeper  silence  than  the  tomb. 
There  is  a  gallery  in  Venice  where  the  facesofthe  Doges  of  ancient 
days  adorn  the  walls,  but  the  eye  suddenly  rests  upon  one  vacant, 
panel — no  portrait  is  there.  lie  who  should  have  filled  it  is  blotted 
from  the  walls  of  memory.  He  fell  in  an  hour  of  temptation  from  his 
high  estate,  and  an  oblivion  was  extended  to  him  by  his  own  and  suc- 
ceeding ages.     And  so,  when   the   poor,  deluded   girl  in  this  case  fell 


122  TRIAL   OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD   BLACK 

into  the  snares  of  the  spoiler,  and  the  knowledge  of  her  wayward 
steps  came  partially  to  her  suffering  parents,  they  strove  to  draw  an 
impenetrable  curtain  around  the  horrible  event ;  and  mosl  of  all  did 
they  wish  to  conceal  the  humiliating  and  harrowing  truth  from  their 
son,  their  only  remaining  child — their  staff  and  hope  in  the  gloomy 
and  desolate  future.  lli~  life  was  dawniugwith  auspicious  omens; 
lie  was  rising  rapidly  in  business;  his  prospects  were  brilliant,  and 
well  mighl  the  father  and  mother  be  reluctant  to  mar  them  with  a  grief 
that  always  rangesin  noble  natures  close  upon  the  confines  of  mad- 
ness. They  were  journeying  towards  the  sunset  of  life,  and  wished  to 
hear  their  burden  alone.  They  sought  to  spate  the  prisoner  in  the 
bright  morning  of  his  existence  this  hitter  cup  of  which  they  drank  in 

solitude,  and  whose  wretched  dregs  they  are  now  draining  in  public. 
It  was  the  sublime  struggle  of  deep  parental  affection  ami  fortitude 
under  the  darkest  calamity  that  ever  blasts  the  peace  of  a  home.    Their 

conduct  was  true  to  the  Loftiest  instincts  that  ever  adorned  the  annals 
of  human  nature.  And  so  it,  was  that  the  prisoner,  on  Sunday,  for 
the  first  time,  and  from  the  lips  of  Mr.  Lowndes,  learned  of  the  awful 
abyss  into  which  his  sister  had  fallen;  who  had  led  her  trusting  foot- 
step to  the  brink,  and  hurled  her  into  its  frightful  and  remorseless 
depths.  The  letter  in  evidence  was  at  the  same  time  shown  him,  and 
he  was  reliably  assured  that  it  Was  written  to  his  sister  by  the 
deceased.  It  conclusively  proves  criminal  intercourse.  The  writer 
speaks  with  an  easy  and  familiar  sense  of  power  over  his  victim.  She 
was  plainly  the  subordinate  of  his  wishes.  All  this  penetrated  the 
heart  and  brain  of  the  prisoner  at  a  glance.  The  facts  were  accumu- 
lating upon  him  with  startling  rapidity.  The  night  before  he  had 
learned  of  the  defilement  of  his  sister's  name  on  the  public  fair 
grounds;  on  this  day  he  was  informed  that  the  very  man  who  had 
hawked  her  name  as  a  harlot  in  the  midst  of  gaping  and  wondering 
multitudes  was  himself  the  author  of  the  ruin  and  dishonor  which  had 
befallen  her.  and  which  he  thus  proclaimed.  The  written  proof  was 
placed  in  his  hands,  lie  went  next  with  Mr.  Lowndes  to  his  mother. 
If  he  hoped  for  comfort  there,  for  once,  at  least,  he  did  not  lind  it ; 
rather  he  found  the  revolting  climax  of  his  misery,  shame,  and  horror. 
It  was  disclosed  to  him  that  a  child,  four  mouths  old,  was  then  in  his 
sister's  arms,  at  her  distant  place  of  retreat,  as  the  result  of  the  treach- 
erous embraces  of  the  deceased.  Oh  !  gentlemen,  no  tongue  can  paint 
the  force  of  this  last  blow  upon  a  heart  already  bruised,  swollen,  and 
bleeding.  The  pride  of  the;  prisoner's  young  life — his  pride  in  an  hon- 
ored and  unsullied  name,  in  the  ties  of  home  and  kindred,  in  the 
friends  he  had  won,  in  the  career  opening  before  him,  was  over- 
thrown and  trampled  in  the  dust  by  the  haughty  and  insolent  tread  of 
his  sister's  seducer.  At  the  prisoner's  time  of  life,  and  with  such  a 
nature  and  reputation  as  his,  how  sensitive  is  the  human  mind  to  dis- 
honor !  And  the  fame  ami  good  name  of  mother  and  sister  are  then 
more  precious  than  all  this  world  contains  and  than  life  itself.  In 
after  years,  wife  and  children  may  divide  the  bounties  of  love,  but  to 
the  pure  and  upright  son  and  brother  who  has  not  yel  left  the  hearth- 
stone of  his  childhood,  the  mother  that  bore  him,  and  the  sister  who 
has  grown  up  by  his  side,  are  the  tender  and  cherished  objects  of  all 
his  earthly  devotion.  It  was  so  with  Crawford  Black.  lie  felt  in  a 
moment  all  the  agony  of  a  whole  life  suddenly  wrecked  and  covered 


FOR  KILLING  COLONEL  W.  W.  m'kAIG,  JR.      123 

with  disaster.  Everything  crumbled  to  pieces  in  an  instant.  Hope 
died,  and  despair  took  its  place  in  his  breast;  his  bright  dreams  of  the 
future  disappeared,  and  a  wall  of  darkness  rose  up  around  him.  The 
sky,  so  clear  before,  grew  black  over  his  bead  ;  he  felt,  too,  that  all  the 
world  knew  the  story  which  was  consuming  his  heart  with  bitterness 
and  grief.  It  had  been  proclaimed  by  him  who  best  knew  its  fearful 
truth.  The  linger  of  scorn  is  a  more  dreadful  instrument  of  torture, 
than  the  cruel  ingenuity  of  man  ever  devised,  and  the  prisoner  now 
knew,  for  the  first  time,  that  it  was  upon  him  ;  that  he  was  pointed  at 
as  one  on  whom  the  brand  of  a  sister's  degradation  had  been  placed 
by  the  successful  arts  of  triumphant  villainy.  In  this  mood  of  mind 
be  witnessed  the  close  of  that  eventful  Sabbath  day.  To  others  it  had 
been  a  day  of  rest ;  not  so  to  him.  To  others  it  had  been  a  day  of 
grace  and  of  blessings;  to  him  it  was  full  of  curses  and  of  evil ;  the 
darkest  day  in  all  the  calendar  of  time.  And  when  night  came  with 
its  healing  influences  for  the  weary  and  sore-hearted,  it  brought  no 
oblivions  antidotes  to  pain  for  this  unfortunate  prisoner.  Wbo  shall 
tell  of  the  scorpion  stings  and  lashes  of  that  miserable  and  sleepless 
night?  You  have  caught  glimpses  here  and  there  from  the  mother's 
testimony  of  the  dismal  hours  as  they  slowly  passed  away.  They  were 
laden  with  the  baleful  ingredients  which  kindle  a  frenzy  in  the  soul 
and  a  madness  in  the  brain.  Gentlemnn,  have  you  ever  .passed 
through  the  deep  floods  of  sorrow  ?  Have  you  ever  walked  the  door 
through  the  silent  watches  of  the  night,  praying  for  the  day  to  dawn, 
and  feeling  that  the  wings  of  time  were  loaded  with  lfad?  Have  grief 
and  woe  ever  affrighted  sleep  from  your  eyelids  and  rest  from  your 
hearts  ?  But  yours,  perhaps,  has  been  the  sorrow  which  comes  of  death 
and  ordinary  bereavement.  Here  was  the  blister  of  shame  burning 
like  a  hot  iron  on  the  prisoner's  brow,  and  a  sense  of  disgrace  like  a 
corroding,  cankering  poison  inflaming  Ins  brain  with  a  fever  which  no 
medicinal  drug  can  allay  or  cool.  The  art  of  the  healer  stops  at  the 
threshhold  of  the  diseased  mind,  and  sinks  down  baffled  and  helpless 
in  the  presence  of  the  delirium  of  woe.  Toward  day,  when  all  the 
world  was  dark  and  lost  to  him,  when  the  precious  providences  of  God 
themselves  seemed  blotted  out  like  stars  in  the  midst  of  clouds  and 
storm,  he  turned  his  weary  steps  toward  that  love  which  never  falters 
or  grows  dim,  which  triumphs  over  dishonor  and  death,  and  shines 
brightest  amidst  the  waitings  of  broken  hearts  and  the  ghastly  ruins  of 
domestic  peace  and  joy.  lie  threw  himself  by  his  mother's  side  to 
comfort  and  be  comforted  in  their  mutual  misery*  He  laid  his  bright 
and  manly  head  when1,  he  had  slept  the  placid  sleep  of  infancy.  There, 
sobbing  and  oppressed,  he  sought  a  shelter.  The  pitiless  and  merciless 
storm  was  pelting  him,  and  "  other  refuge  had  he  none."  Mother  and 
son  wept  together  over  the  erring  and  the  lost.  There  is  often  a 
mercy  in  tears,  but  not  in  such  as  are  shed  over  a  loved  one  ruined  in 
SOU]  and  body.  Then  the  unsealed  fountains  are  scalding  and  bitter  as 
the  waters  of  .Marah.  While  the  parent  and  child  thus  lament  to- 
gether  we  will  turn  from  this  scene  of  holy  pathos  and  tenderness  and 
consider  an  important  question  which  here  arises  in  the  order  of  my 
argument. 

You  have  been  asked,  with  earnest  emphasis,  by  the  counsel  for  the 
prosecution  why  the  prisoner  was  so  crushed  and  appalled  with  grief 
and  frenzy  against  the  deceased.     You  are  reminded  that  we  were  not 


12-i  TRIAL    OF    IIAKUY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

allowed  by  the  Court  to  prove  the  direct  fact  of  the  sister's  seduction 
by  McKaig.  You  will  remember  our  urgent  offer  to  do  so,  and  the 
determined  0]  position  to  such  proof  on  the  part  <>f  the  learned  gentle- 
man for  the  Slate,  The  Court  held  in  your  hearing  that  the  informa- 
tion which  the  prisoner  received  on  that  subject  was  competent  evi- 
dence, 'nit  that  the  fact  itself  of  the  seduction  was  not  an  issue  before 
you.  "Was  he  informed  upon  competent  authority?  Had  be  a  right,  as 
a  reasonable  and  prudent,  man.  to  believe  that  Colonel  McKaig  bad 
seduced  Myra  Black,  and  that  she  bad  borne  a  child  as  the  result  of 
their  sinful  intercourse?  Did  the  facts,  as  communicated  to  him,,  jus- 
tify such  a  belief,  and  did  he  entertain  it  with  the  dee])  convictions  of 
an  honest  sincerity?  If  so,  then  bis  sister's  ruin  by  the  deceased 
became  a  proven,  fixed,  and  absolute  reality  in  bis  mind,  as  much  so 
as  if  bis  eyes  bad  beheld  or  bis  ears  beard  the  secret  deeds  of  shame 
over  which  the  deep  spell  of  silence  reigns  forever.  If  he  believed, 
then  his  mind  was  wrought  upon  by  the  power  of  a  sincere  faith.  His 
emotions  and  bis  conduct  were  under  its  omnipotent  influence  ;  and  in 
this  respect  be  simply  conformed  to  the  great  laws  which  have  gov- 
erned all  the  races  and  tribes  of  mankind  since  the  birthday  of  human 
history.  You  and  I  believe  in  the  great  and  merciful  Father  in  heaven, 
the  creator  of  the  boundless  universe,  yet  we  have  not  seen  him,  nor 
bath  any  man  and  lived.  We  believe that  the  blessed  Saviour.walked  the 
bills  and  plains  of  Judea,  and  died  to  redeem  the  souls  of  men,  but 
our  eyes  did  not  behold  the  majesty  of  his  face,  nor  ourears  drink  in  the 
deep  and  melancholy  music  of  his  voice.  We  believe  because  we  have 
faith  in  the  sources  of  our  information.  We  have  been  told,  thai  is 
all.  The  testimony  of  the  ages  is  ours.  Nature  throughout  her  illimiti- 
ble  realms  proclaims  a  God,  and  the  Bible,  the  Book  of  books  reveals 
him  ;  while  the  existence  and  the  divine  mission  of  the  Messiah  are 
established  by  witnesses  whose  evidence  we  read  and  accept  as  true. 
Upon  these  sources  of  faith  Christain  men  and  women  found  their 
hopes  of  immortal  happiness.  They  make  Heaven  an  immediate  re- 
ality, and  uphold  the  martyr  as  be  smiles  joyfully  amidst  the  blazing 
faggots  at  the  stake.  Nor  is  the  power  of  human  belief  over  the  ac- 
tions of  men  lessened  because  it  may  be  founded  in  error.  The  un- 
tamed Indian  has  bis  faith  as  we  have  ours.  He  has  not  seen  the  Man- 
ito,  but  his  trust  in  the  happy  hunting  grounds,  the  sparkling  rivers, 
and  the  fadeless  verdure  of  an  eternal  world  is  as  unfaltering  as  the. 
bravest  disciples  that  ever  died  for  the  cause  of  the  Cross.  He  sings 
his  death  song  under  slow  tortures,  recounts  his  earthly  deeds  of  merit 
and  anticipates  his  blissful  rewards  hereafter  with  all  the  calmness 
and  confidence  of  a  Christian  philosopher.  The  eastern  Mussulman 
worships  with  sincere  devotion  at  the  shrine  of  Mahomet,  and  giving 
full  credit  to  the  testimony  of  bis  fathers,  follows  the  Crescent  and  re- 
joices in  the  prospect  of  a  sensual  paradise  at  the  end  of  life.  The 
Chinaman,  the  countryman  of  Confucius,  has  a  faith  in  bis  system 
equally  firm  and  unrelenting.  The  history  of  the  whole  human  race 
forces  us  to  exclaim,  how  little  is  known  and  bow  much  is  believed  ! 
The  world  of  faith  is  wide,  the  world  of  knowledge  is  narrow.  What 
we  think  we  know  best  depends  mainly  upon  the  credibility  of  those 
who  have  narrated  to  us  the  facts.  How  few  of  you  have  crossed  the 
mountains  and  beheld  the  valley  of  the  Mississippi !  Yet  you  know 
that  there  it  lies,  stretching  from  the  regions  of  perpetual  snow  to  the 


FOE    KILLING    COLONEL   W.   W.   m'IvAIG,   JR.  125 

land  of  unending  summer,  an  empire  of  present  and  future  wealth 
and  populations.  What  one  of  this  jury  has  ever  beheld  the  great 
father  of  waters  as  he  rolls  onward  to  the  Gulf  of  Mexico?  Yet  you 
all  know  that  the  ceaseless  and  resistless  current  is  forever  there.  You 
have  listened  to  the  tales  of  travelers  ;  you  have  read  their  letters  and 
their  hooks,  and  you  are  convinced  as  fully  as  you  could  be  through 
the  medium  of  your  own  senses.  I  only  ask  for  the  prisoner  that  these 
universal  rules  of  faith  he  extended  to  him  in  this  dark  hour  of  his 
peril.  I  do  not  ask  you  to  shield  him  if  his  belief  was  irrational  and 
unnatural — if  he  accepted  information  from  unworthy  and  unreliable 
persons.  Put  yourselves  in  his  place  ;  could  he  doubt  the  truth  and  can- 
dor of  his  faithful  and  tried  friend,  Henshavv?  Could  he  distrust  his 
kinsman  and  advisor  Lowndes?  But  above  all,  were  not  the  words 
of  his  idolized  mother  sacred  and  holy  with  him  ?  No  better,  surer 
foundations  of  human  belief  ever  challenged  the  consent  of  the  hu- 
man mind.  Crawford  Black  as  much  knew,  by  the  time  the  sun  set  on 
Sunday  evening,  that  McKaig  had  destroyed  his  sister  as  it  is  given  to 
mortals  to  know  the  affairs  of  this  life.  No  doubt  or  misgiving  for  a  mo- 
ment mitigated  his  anguish.  The  awful  fact  stared  him  in  the  face  with 
painful  and  maddening  intensity.  It  confronted  him  incessantly.  It 
would  not  down  at  his  bidding.  It  taunted  and  mocked  him  in  his  sleep- 
less desolation  and  despair.  It  tempted  his  imagination  with  the  appal- 
ling details  of  the  victims'1  surrender  and  debasement,  and  the  destroyers 
triumph  and  insolence.  And  if  he  arose  and  acted  upon  this  fact  and  slew 
the  man  who  had  put  out  the  light  and  joy  of  an  innocent  and  unoffend- 
ing household  would  his  conduct  have  been  without  precedent,  novel  and 
strange  in  the  history  of  mankind?  There  is  a  very  old  case  and  of  very 
high  authority  on  this  point.  It  is  the  earliest  on  record.  The  daughter 
of  Jacob  was  seduced  by  a  prince  of  one  of  the  neighboring  tribes.  Her 
brothers,  Simeon  and  Levi  were  in  the  fields  at  their  usual  avocations, 
when  they  were  told  by  others  of  what  had  befallen  their  sister.  They 
believed  the  story  of  their  disgrace,  and  with  their  swords,  in  due 
time,  they  acted  upon  it  to  the  total  destruction,  not  merely  of  the  se- 
ducer, but  of  the  whole  tribe  who  supported  him  in  his  conduct.  And 
when  their  father,  who  was  old  and  apprehensive  of  trouble  growing 
out  of  their  terrible  vengeance,  deplored  their  fierce  and  sanguinary 
measures,  they  gave  that  memorable  answer  which  has  sprung  to  the 
lips  of  manly  brothers  in  every  age  and  clime  from  that  hour  to  this, 
"Shall  he  deal  with  our  sister  as  a  harlot?"  Human  nature  is  the 
same  to-day  as  it  was  then,  and  Crawford  Black  simply  exclaimed  with 
Simeon  and  Levi  of  old.  You  would  cry  out  in  the  same  indignant 
words  under  the  same  circumstances.  You  are  now  asked  to  punish  this 
young  brother  in  Maryland.  Were  the  brothers  in  Israel  punished? 
God  ruled  immediately  and  directly  in  the  house  of  Jacob.  Are  you 
wiser  and  more  just  than  your  Maker?  Will  you  sit  in  judgment  upon 
the  Almighty  and  condemn  his  ways ?  Should  you  not  rather  find  out 
His  rulings  in  a  case  so  similar  to  the  one  you  aretrying^and  then  im- 
plicitly and  humbly  adopt  them  for  your  guidance?  The  patriarch 
and  his  family,  including  the  two  defenders  of  their  sisters'  honor, 
Were  led  by  Jehovah  out  from  among  their  enemies,  up  into  Bethel, 
a  place  of  safety.  "  And  they  journeyed  ;  and  the  terror  of  God  wus 
upon  the  cities  that  were  round  about  them,  and  they  did  not  pursue 
after  the  BOns  of  Jacob."     They  were  thus  protected,  not  prosecuted. 


126  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

I  may  cite  other  cases  hereafter,  but  with  the  approval  of  God  upon 
tli"  conduct  of  the  prisoner,  I  know  thai  I  might  safely  leave  this 
branch  of  his  defense  where  it  now  rests. 

Gentlemen  of  the  jury,  the  light  of  Monday  morning  at  last 
broke  over  the  hills  of  Cumberland  and  brought  thai  dreadful 
night  to  a  close.  The  sun  of  the  morning  conies  with  life  in  its 
beams  to  all.  Tt  illuminates  the  hovel  ami  the  palace;  the  home 
of  the  heart-broken  and  the.  circles  of  gayety  and  pleasure.  In  all 
its  kindly  visitations  of  human  abodes,  however,  on  that  morning 
it  lit  up  no  lonelier,  sadder,  drearier  hearthstone  than  that  around 
which  once  shown  the  pure  and  innocent  face  of  the  beloved 
daughter  and  sister,  to  be  seen  there  with  the  angel  light  of  virtue 
no  more  forever.  The  prisoner  went  forth  from  that  blighted 
home,  and  the  hour  of  retributive  justice  drew  nigh;  not  by  his 
artihee  or  device,  but  by  the  spirit  of  the  avenging  Nemesis  who 
sooner  or  later  overtakes  the  violators  of  domestic  sanctity.  His 
provocation  was  already  sufficient  in  the  estimation  of  all  the 
ages  of  the  past  to  justify  the  death  of  McKaig.  While  he  stands, 
however,  on  the  brow  of  the  hill,  and  before  he  descends,  weary 
and  heavy  laden  into  the  town,  let  us  examine  still  more  closely 
into  the  relations  which  the  deceased  and  the  accused  bore  to  each 
other.  What  were  the  purposes  and  feelings  which  McKaig  had 
deliberately  and  repeatedly  evinced  toward  Black?  One  of  the 
oldest  and  basest  principles  of  human  nature  was  at  work  in  the 
heart  of  the  deceased.  lie  had  wronged  the  prisoner  beyond  the 
reach  of  forgiveness,  and  he  therefore  hated  him.  The  scandal, 
too,  of  his  conduct  had  become  public  and  he  thought  to  brow- 
beat all  complaining  voices  into  sileuce.  His  own  domestic  peace 
was  doubtless  in  peril,  and  it  was  necessary  to  overawe  the  injured 
family  into  abject  submission.  He  had  met  the  insane  and  fran- 
tic father,  and  received  an  assault  vaguely  mentioned  here  in  the 
evidence.  No  danger  or  menace,  however,  threatened  him  any 
longer  in  that  quarter.  The  forbearance  of  the  distracted  father 
was  secured  by  indictment  and  heavy  bonds.  There  was  but  one 
other  who  held  the  honor  of  the  name  and  the  household  in  his 
keeping.  It  was  the  brave,  generous,  dauntless  being  here  before 
you,  and  it  was  for  him  that  McKaig  wore  his  daily  belt  of  loaded 
fire-arms.  Conscience  told  the  deceased  that  he  had  forfeited  his 
life  to  the  prisoner.  He  would  have  slain  the  seducer  of  his  own 
sister  like  a  dog  in  the  highways,  and  the  guilt  in  his  breast  bade 
him  beware  of  the  brother  of  his  victim.  Perhaps,  friendly  ton- 
gues had  also  warned  him  of  his  danger  if  the  accused  ever  made 
a  full  discovery.  Thus  steeped  in  crime  I  shall  demonstrate  from 
the  evidence  that  he  sought  a  collision  with  Black  under  circum- 
stances of  his  own  choosing,  and  with  the  advantages  all  in  favor 
of  himself.  He  could  not  retrace  his  steps  and  undo  the  wrongs 
he  had  inflicted.  He  therefore  prepared  to  go  forward  and  wade 
in  blood  to  a  place  of  safety;  a  place  of  security,  as  he  supposed, 
against  the  consequences  of  his  own  evil  deeds.  He  believed  the 
issue  would  come,  and  he  became  restless  and  agressive  in  order 
to  have  it  no  longer  pending.  Why  else  did  he  rudely  jostle  the 
prisoner  in  Ferguson's  saloon?  Between  friends  such  an  act 
might  pass  without  siguiiicauce;  but  when  men  are  deadly  foes; 


FOR  KILLING  COLONEL  W.  W.  m'KAIG,  JR.      127 

when  their  hostility  is  open  and  proclaimed;  when  unpardonable 

wrongs  have  been  given  and  received;  when  their  blood  is  full  of 
wrath;  when  the  insulter  is  armed  with  weapons  of  death,  then 
the  intentional  touch  in  passing  is  a  threat  and  a  challenge  of  the 
deepest  and  most  sinister  import.  What  Lawrence  Wilson  saw 
has  that  meaning  and  none  other.  It  was  McKaig's  palpable  pur- 
pose to  provoke  Black  into  a  fight  at  a  time  and  place  of  his  own 
selection,  and  with  his  preparations  doubtless  fully  made.  Wil- 
son is  not  contradicted.  He  located  the  place  and  fixed  the  time 
and  mentioned  the  presence  of  others  on  the  occasion.  The  bar- 
keeper was  especially  identified.  If  this  evidence  was  untrue; 
if  the  deceased  and  the  prisoner  were  not  thereat  the  time  named; 
if  the  circumstancs  of  insolence  and  assault  did  not  take  place  as 
described,  the  means  were  amply  furnished  by  the  witness  himself 
for  his  detection  and  contradiction.  If  it  was  a  fabrication  it 
would  have  been  demolished  longerewow.  Thereis  power  and  wealth 
and  the  thirst  for  revenge  in  this  prosecution,  and  no  great  fact 
like  this  would  be  left  standing  if  it  could  have  been  overthrown. 
It  occurred  but  two  weeks  before  the  fall  of  the  deceased,  and 
throws  a  full  flood  of  light  upon  his  movements  and  motives  at 
the  final  and  deadly  encounter.  Its  importance  in  this  case  can 
not  be  magnified.  It  is  uncontradicted,  and,  therefore,  conceded 
that  when  these  two  young  men  are  first  brought  to  your  view  to- 
gether the  deceased  was  the  hostile  aggressor  seeking  to  degrade 
or  slay  the  brother  as  he  had  worse  than  slain  the  sister.  How 
much  longer  was  Crawford  Black  to  endure?  How  much  more  of 
the  proud  man's  contumely  was  he  to  bear?  But  the  hour  had 
not  yet  come;  he  knew  not  yet  the  full  story  of  infamy  which 
afterward  filled  his  soul  with  horror. 

But  there  is  yet  stronger  and  more  striking  evidence  of  Mc- 
Kaig's deadly  purposes  toward  the  accused.  John  Long,  born 
and  reared  in  Cumberland,  well  known  by  all,  detailed  a  scene 
upon  '.he  witness  stand  that  will  never  be  forgotten  by  those  who 
heard  it.  It  is  said  that  the  deceased  was  a  brave  man.  It  may 
be  so.  I  have  no  doubt  he  acted  with  courage  in  battle.  Many 
have  done  so,  surrounded  by  admiring  comrades,  inspired  by  hopes 
of  distinction,  who  have  faltered  in  the  face  of  a  personal  conflict; 
especially  so  when  not  upheld  by  the.  consciousness  of  right.  He 
who  hath  bis  quarrel  just  has  a  contempt  for  danger  which  the 
heart  oppressed  with  guilt  never  knows.  A  troubled  conscience 
makes  many  strange  and  devious  steps.  Many  actions  thaWire 
mysterious  to  l  he  world  would  be  thus  explained  if  the  secrets  of 
all  hearts  could  lie  laid  bare.  When  John  Long  saw  McKaig 
watching  the  prisoner  at  that  street  corner  with  iiis  hand  on  his 
pistol,  he  was  but  acting  in  obedience  to  the  hard  necessities  of 
bis  criminal  position.  The  consequences  of  his  evil  career  were 
developed  in  his  own  character.  His  own  nature  was  depraved 
and  perverted  until  we  see  him  by  the  light  of  this  evidence, 
lying  in  wait  meditating  what  measure  of  destruction  he  should 
next  adopt  against  this  unoffending  family,  it  gives  me  no  pleas- 
ure to  speak  these  words.  The  truth  is  painful  to  me  when  it 
reproaches  the  dead,  but  the  claims  of  the  living  here  in  this 
court-roum  cannot  be  denied.     What  the  immediate  intentions 


12S 


TRIAL    Ol'    HARRY    CRAWFORD    I3LACK. 


of  the  deceased  were  while  he  was  waylaying  the  prisoner,  you 
and  I  may  not  fully  determine.  He  may  not  have  entirely  com* 
prehended  them  himself,  To  my  mind  he  appears  on  that  occa- 
sion irresolute,  undecided,  wavering,  and  halting  between  the 
conflicting  purposes  of  his  own  disturbed  and  agitated  breast;  at 
one  moment  strongly  impelled  to  confront  and  assault  the  pris- 
oner, and  the  next  hesitating  and  doubting,  until  the  opportunity 
for  decisive  action  went  hy.  But  an  effort  has  been  made  to  dis- 
credit Long.  In  what  way?  He  is  a  native  of  Cumberland,  and 
there  grew  up  to  manhood,  and  though  his  face  wears  a  darker 
color  than  yours  or  mine,  yet  no  man  dares  to  savin  your  pres- 
ence that  he  lias  not  borne  as  good  a  character  for  truth  and  verac- 
ity as  the  loftiest  and  proudest  in  that  community.  Although 
hundreds  of  citizens  of  Alleghany  county  have  attended  this  pro- 
tracted trial,  and  hundreds  more  could  have  been  obtained  in  a 
few  hours,  yet  no  impeachment  of  the  reputation  of  this  well- 
known  and  vitally  important  witness  was  attempted  in  the  re- 
motest manner.  This  is  equivalent  to  the  affirmative  support  of 
his  credibility  by  the  entire  community  in  which  he  lives.  But  at 
the  last  moment  two  zealous  colaborers  in  this  prosecution  rushed 
into  court  and  lifted  up  their  hands  and  voices  to  contradict  John 
Long — Dr  Dougherty  and  Smith  Johnson!  Both  admit  that  they 
are  partisans  in  feeling  against  this  unfortunateyoung  man,  who  has 
never  harmed  them  by  word  or  deed.  They  tell  you  that  two 
nights  ago,  in  the  dim  still  hours  between  midnight  and  day,  when 
the  evil  and  prowling  spirits  of  the  known  and  the  unknown 
world  usually  commit  their  nocturnal  freaks  against  the  peace  of 
mankind,  they  inspected  and  surveyed  the  localities  described  by 
Long,  decided  there  in  the  dark  that  he  could  not  have  seen  Mc- 
Kaig  where  he  swore  he  did  see  him;  took  the  cars  in  haste  for 
tliiscityand  arrived  just  in  time  to  detail  their  astounding  di>- 
covery  before  the  testimony  in  the  case  was  finally  closed.  Long 
was  examined  more  than  a  week  ago.  There  is  a  line  of  telegraph 
and  a  railroad  from  here  to  Cumberland,  and  there  is  a  venomous 
energy  and  power  in  this  prosecution  unparalleled  in  my  expe- 
perience.  If  Long  was  false  and  the  locality  itself  as  given  by 
him  would  expose  his  perjury,  would  his  contradiction  have  been 
left  to  the  finishing  details  of  the  case  and  to  the  ridiculous  testi- 
mony of  Dougherty  and  Johnson?  No!  Scores  of  men  would 
have  been  promptly  produced,  having  made  careful  daylight  ex- 
aminations of  the  points  in  dispute  and  ready  to  tell  you  that  this 
great,  gigantic  fact  established  by  Long  was  impossible  from  phy- 
sical causes.  Gross  and  Ferguson,  the  proprietors  of  the  saloon, 
and  familiar  with  the  corner  where  McKaig  was  seen,  with  the 
spot  where  Long  st^od  and  with  the  positions  of  the  lamps  that 
have  been  mentioned,  would  have  been  the  most  competent  and 
proper  witnesses  on  this  point.  Why  were  they  not  called  instead 
of  these  hasty,  prejudiced,  midnight  surveyors?  John  Long 
might  and  would  have  been  contradicted  if  his  statement  had 
been  untrue,  but  he  stands  here  now  uncontradicted  and  unim- 
peached.  Let  the  doctor,  therefore,  assuage  his  feelings  in  the 
use  of  his  scalpel  and  pills  upon  his  patients,  and  let  him  and 
Johnson  both  hereafter  abandon  the  business  of  willing  and  anxi- 


FOR    KILLING    COLOXEL    W.    \V.    m'kAIG,   JR.  129 

nus  witnesses  against  an  innocent  man  on  trial  for  his  life.  If 
they  are  satisfied  with  their  appearance  in  this  sad  drama,  T  will 
now  drop  the  curtain,  while  the  audience  hoots  and  hisses  them 
out  of  sight  and  out  of  mind 

But  again;  Long  was  faithful  to  his  early  playmate  and  friend. 
On  the  distressful  Sunday,  when  the  fearful  truth  was  rapidly 
breaking  upon  the  distracted  mind  of  the  prisoner,  John  Long  met 
him,  as  he  told  you,  on  the  bridge  in  Cumberland  for  the  first 
time  since  he  had  witnessed  McKaig's  secret  menaces  a  few  days 
before  against  his  life.  Tlis  inquiry  of  him  was  most  natural — 
"When  did  you  see  Colonel  McKaig  last?"  Crawford  Black's 
heart  was  bitter  and  sore  at  that  moment.  The  sound  of  that 
name  maddened  him.  His  reply  to  the  faithful  boy  that  loved, 
him  was  stern  and  angry:  "What  is  that  to  you?"  Grief  and 
humiliation  have  their  right  to  solitude  and  exclusion,  and  tho 
prisoner  repelled  what  he  took  to  be  an  attempt  to  invade  his  con- 
fidence and  look  upon  the  bleeding  wounds  of  his  miserable  heart. 
Long  corrected  his  mistake,  and  narrated  to  him  the  recent  strange 
and  threatening  behavior  of  McKaig.  He  put  him  in  possession 
of  every  detail.  The  prisoner  listened,  and  left  in  silence.  Tie 
now  knew  not  only  that  his  sister  had  fallen,  but  that  his  own  life 
was  hunted.  Dishonor  had  already  come,  and  death  was  pending. 
His  sister  led  to  her  ruin,  and  then  advertised  to  the  public  by  her 
destroyer  as  a  common  bawd,  his  aged  father  reviled,  and  de- 
nounced and  prosecuted  as  a  felon  for  his  feeble  and  vain  attempt 
at  redress,  and  now  thoroughly  convinced  that  he  himself  was  to 
be  watched,  threatened,  glared  at,  bullied,  waylaid,  and  eventu- 
ally subjected  to  deadly  assault!  What  more  of  outrage  and 
provocation  can  man  submit  to  unless,  like  a  hound,  he  re- 
ceives the  kick  and  the  lash  of  his  master?  Bear  in  mind  that 
meeting  on  the  bridge  and  Long's  statement.  Do  not  for  a  mo- 
ment forget  it.  Invoke  it  into  your  presence  when  you  retire, 
lor  with  such  a  notice  as  he  then  received  the  prisoner  had  the 
right  to  kill  the  deceased  whenever  he  approached  him  with  the 
slighest  evidences  of  hostility  in  his  movements.  No  retreat, 
no  delay  was  after  this  required  of  him.  Henceforth  if  lie  slew 
McKaig  he  had  a  double  defense;  each  one  assure  and  firm  as 
the  everlasting  hills.  His  sisters's  cause  and  his  own  united  in 
their  appearand  the  spirit  of  his  noble  manhood  responded ;  a 
volcano  justly  raged  within  his  breast,  and  Providence  dictated 
the  moment  of  its  eruption  and  the  result  which  followed.  The 
burden  of  the  prisoner  was  more  than  he  could  bear,  and  he  moved 
and  acted  as  an  instrument  in  the  hands  of  a  just  God.  You 
are  to  judge  of  his  conduct  as  if  you  had  been  in  his  situation. 
That  is  your  duty  to-day.  I  state  it  in  the  hearing  of  the  Court, 
and  in  the  presence  of  my  profsessional  hretliern.  You  are. 
not  to  estimate  his  guilt  or  innocence  by  the  appearance  of  tho 

circumstances  to  a  c 1,  indifferent, and  disinterested  observer. 

Y"ou  are  to  put  yourselves  in  his  place,  assume  ins  relations  to  others, 
imbibe  his  affections,  and  survey  everything  from  his  point  of 
view;  stand  with  hi tu  on  the  brow  of  the  hill,  near  the  old  home- 
stead, where  1  left  him  some  t  ime  ago;  recall  to  your  minds  all  Miat 
lie  then  knew  of  McKaig's  conduct  in  the  past,  and  of  his  purposes 


130  TRIAL    OF  HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

a  gain  si  himself  in  the  future,  and  answer  in  your  hearts  whether 
the  wealth  and  honors  of  the  whole  earth  would  have  tempted 
you  to  embrace  the  prospect  that  lay  before  him  as  your  own. 
You  cannot  desire  to  take  this  young  life,  to  cut  the  briefly  spun 

thread  of  liis  exist  enee;  you  cannot  wish  to  rear  a  gibbet  against 
your  sky  with  that  elegant  and  accomplished  form  upon  it.  and 
that  handsome  and  intelligent  face  shrouded  for  the  grave.  Such 
a  doom  cannot  he  a  welcome  thought  to  you.  I  dent  if y yourselves, 
then,  with  him  as  the  waves  of  sorrow  and  of  peril  rolled  over  his 
head,  and  yon  will  reach  forth  your  hands,  your  all  powerful 
hands,  to  Mess  and  to  save  him. 

And,  gentlemen,  now  as  Harry  Crawford  Black  descends  into 
the  town,  the  other  party  to  this  tragedy  of  blood,  of  broken  hearts 
and  ruined  lives,  came  forth  from  his  home  at  the  other  extrem- 
ity of  the  place.  It  is  claimed  by  the  a  Me  attorney  general  that  he 
was  slain  contrary  to  the  peace  of  the  State  of  Man  land,  [f  so,  then 
he  must  have  been  at  peace  himself  with  her  citizens,  and  in  obedi- 
ence to  her  laws.  The  picture  of  his  peaceful  departure  from  home 
has  been  vividly  drawn.  As  a  pure  work  of  fancy,  it  has  high 
merits.  The  reality,  however,  was  speedily  shown  when  he  mel 
the  prisoner.  When  he  arose  that  morning  he  made  a  toilet  of 
death,  and  clothed  himself  with  the  implements  of  destruction. 
Three  loaded  revolvers,  as  the  proof  establishes,  constituted  his 
s,|l'ply;  one  in  the  prepared  pistol  pocket  on  his  hip,  and  two  in 
their  leather  holsters  belted  around  his  waist,  lie  sallied  forth 
more  heavily  armed  than  any  man  who  had  walked  the  streets  of 
Cumberland  since  the  close  of  the  sanguinary  strife  between  the 
north  and  the  south.  Instead  of  being  afollowerof  peace,  he  was  a 
moving  machine  of  war.  Instead  of  being  a  law-abiding  citizen,  his 
preparations  were  those  of  the  desperate  and  deadly  outlaw.  And 
as  he  thus  prepared  himself  I  ask  you  to  look  at  him  in  the  light 
of  his  previous  conduct  toward  the  prisoner;  in  the  light  of  his 
conduct  as  described  by  Long  at  the  corner  of  the  street,  and 
of  his  menacing  insult  at  Ferguson's  saloon.  You  cannot  mis- 
take his  fatal  meaning.  lie  was  bent  on  bloody  mischief 
131ack  had  uttered  no  threats  against  him ;  not  one  has  been 
proven  or  attempted  to  be  proven  ;  he  did  not  arm,  therefore,  for 
self-defense.  He  had  not  been  apprised  of  any  danger  from  the 
prisoner,  except  by  the  suggestions  of  his  own  guilty  conscience. 
They  told  him,  perhaps,  of  the  necessity  of  prompt,  determined, 
and  aggressive  action.  We  can  only  judge,  however,  by  his 
acts,  and  they  speak  in  clear  and  certain  tones.  When  you 
once  saw  armies  in  these  now  smiling  and  happy  valleys  equip 
themselves  with  the  cannon,  the  rille,  and  the  bayonet,  and 
move  forward  toward  the  enemy,  you  knew  that  the  sorrowful 
heaps  of  the  slain  and  the  wounded  would  soon  cumber  the  ground 
and  appeal  piteously  to  heaven.  So,  too,  when  you  behold  a  citi- 
zen in  time  of  peace  invade  your  streets  with  the  most  extensive 
a>nd  extraordinary  preparations  for  taking  human  life,  you  at  once 
fear  and  expect  scenes  of  violence  and  calamity. 

Am  I  answered  that  Black,  too,  was  armed?  Who  ever  had  so 
much  reason  to  be?  May  not  a  threatened  life  defend  itself?  He 
had  one  pistol  ;  was   not  one-third  as  powerful  in  conthct  as  his 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    M'ZAIG,   JR.  131 

enemy;  lie  had  five  balls  ready  for  action.  Tt  is  admitted  by  the 
prosecution  that  MoKaighad  twelve,  and  the  testimony  shows  con- 
clusively that  he  had  eighteen.  I  have  thus  traced  these  parties, 
described  their  relations  to  each  other,  and  their  disposition  in  re- 
gard to  a  collision  until  I  have  reached  the  time  and  place  when 
and  where  they  met.  And  here  I  again  deplore  your  absence  from 
the  spot  where  a  personal  inspection  would  give  you  a  more  accu- 
rate knowledge  of  the  transaction  than  any  description  at  this  dis- 
tance. But  concern  ingt  he  leadingfactstherecan  lie  no  doubt.  Black 
was  on  the  south  side  of  the  street  going  west;  McKaig  was  on  the 
north  side  of  the  street  going  east ;  thus  they  were  on  the  same 
street,  but  meeting  with  its  whole  width  between  them.  Through 
Cumberland  runs  Will's  creek,  and  over  it,  on  this  street,  is  an 
elevated  bridge.  The  evidence  first  disclosed  the  deceased  as  he 
was  crossing  that  bridge  with  the  prisoner  in  full  view  diagonally 
to  his  right  on  the  other  side  of  the  street.  There  they  first  be- 
held each  other  that  morning.  Every  step  now  assumes  the  most 
terrible  importance,  and  is  charged  with  the  responsibility  of  life,  and 
death.  Who  sought  the  banquet  of  blood?  Who  turned  from  his  own 
pat  hway  to  interfere  with  the  course  of  the  other?  Not  an  object 
was  between  them  to  obscure  the  view.  The  instant  McKaig  saw 
Black  he  left  his  own  sidewalk  immediately  at  the  east  end  of  the 
bridge,  where  there  was  no  crossing  for  pedestrians  as  at  the  inter- 
sections of  streets,  diverged  obliquely  to  his  right  on  a  line  that 
would  bring  him  to  the  sidewalk  on  which  the  prisoner  stood  about 
thirty  feet  in  front  of  him.  lie  walked  rapidly  in  that  direction. 
"Why  did  he  thus  leave  the  even  tenor  of  his  way,  and  bear  sud- 
denly down  on  Black?  Why  did  he  not  pass  on  and  let  the  pris- 
oner do  the  same?  Was  that  Providence,  whose  moral  laws  he 
had  mocked  and  spurned,  hovering  over  the  scene,  and  guiding 
him  to  his  swift  and  awful  doom?  Did  the  fair  and  open  oppor- 
tunity tempt  him  to  his  own  destruction  in  seeking  the  destruc- 
tion of  another?  lie  could  have  let  the  prisoner  alone;  but  a  be- 
lief in  the  efficiency  of  his  arsenal,  and  a  blind  and  fatal  infatuation 
carried  him  with  defiant  confidence  into  a  presence  most  danger- 
ous to  him  on  that  morning — the  presence  of  one  who  had  just 
emerged  from  a  night  of  sleepless  phrenzy  over  the  injuries,  the 
incurable  and  burning  injuries,  he  had  received  from  the  man  who 
now  sought  and  approached  him. 

Is  it  pretended  tnat  thissuddpn  movement  by  McKaig  had  no 
hostile  meaning?  Consider  all  that  had  passed  between  them 
before;  consider  all  the  provocations,  the  insults  and  the  threats, 
for  actions  often  utter  louder  and  deadlier  threats  than  words. 
Consider  al!  the  past,  and  consider  the  warlike  preparation  of  the 
deceased,  and  then  determine  whether  he  crossed  that  street  with- 
out a  purpose.  But  you  are  not  left  to  the  uncertain  field  of  con- 
jecture. The  evidence  makes  his  motives  as  plain  as  the  light  of 
Idle  sun.  The  sinister  movements  of  his  hands  make  a  perfect 
revelation  of  his  designs.  The  cane  was  in  his  right  hand  as  he, 
passed  over  the  bridge.  Conner,  a  witness  for  the  State,  saw  it  as 
well  as  Davis,  a  witness  for  the  defense.  Conner  turned  away 
and  saw  no  more;  Davis  saw  it  shifted  from  the  right  to  the  left 
hand  by  the  deceased  as  he  approached  the  prisoner,     lie  saw  that 


132  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

right  Land,  thus  relieved  of  the  cane,  t.r<>  back  to  the  hip  p 
and  come  in  contact  wit  h  a  shining  objecl ;  the  polished  handle  to 
one  of  his  pistols.  l>o  I  mistate  the  testimony  V  Would  I  dare  do 
so  even  if  restrained  by  no  higher  motive  than  the  success  of  my 
cause?  Nothing  is  more  dangerous  than  to  attempt  a  fraud  upon 
a  jury.  You  have  heard  every  word  here  uttered, and  you  quickly 
resent  the  effort  of  consul  to  mislead  you.  No  attempt  was  made 
to  contradict  Davis;  this  you  know.  Others  profess  to  have  seen 
the  deceased  while  crossing  the  street  who  were  called  by  the 
prosecution.  Why  was  not  one  of  them  asked  in  regard  to  the 
change  of  the  cane?  Because  it  was  known  to  he  true.  There 
was  no  hope  of  contradicting  this  crushing  fact.  And  the  motion 
of  the  hand  for  the  pistol  is  equally  proven.  Is  there  anything 
unreasonable  in  all  this?  He  had  betrayed  active  hostility  on 
former  occasions.  Why  not  now?  He  was  fixed  for  the  affray;  he 
never  could  he  readier ;  he  did  not  know  the  condition  of  the 
prisoner's  mind;  he  did  not  know  that  in  the  prisoner's  breast 
had  been  boiling  a  fierce  cauldron  for  the  last  thirty-six  intoller- 
able  hours;  he  did  not  know  that  he  was  himself  at  that  moment 
the  one  supremely  horrible  thought  in  Black's  feverish  brain.  He 
thought  to  confront  him  unawares,  perhaps  to  brow  beat,  degrade, 
and  trample  him  under  foot;  perhaps  to  slay  him  where  he  stood. 
Colonel  McKaig  was  a  full  man  in  years,  large,  commanding,  and 
powerful  in  person.  Crawford  Black  is  slight,  almost  a  hoy  in  size 
as  in  age.  There  wras  the  contemptuous  confidence  of  Goliath  on 
the  one  hand,  and  the  just  cause  and  unquailiug  heart  of  David 
on  the  other. 

Gentlemen,  I  need  not  read  from  books  to  inform  you  what  the 
prisoner's  rights  were  when  he  saw  his  mortal  foe  approach  him 
preparing  with  hasty  strides  to  become  his  instant  executioner. 
The  law  of  self-defense  is  written  in  the  heart  of  man  more  plainly 
and  powerfully  than  in  the  pages  of  libraries.  We  here  place  our 
feet  on  its  solid  and  eternal  foundations.  We  build  upon  it  a 
bouse  of  refuge  for  the  prisoner,  which  will  withstand  the  fury  of 
the  storm  and  the  malice  of  his  enemies.  Ho  was  not  called  upon 
to  retreat.  I  spurn  the  doctrine  of  being  driven  to  the  wall  or  the 
ditch,  that  odious  doctrine  of  degradation,  danger  and  death  to 
the  assaulted  party.  Every  inch  of  ground  on  which  he  stood  was 
his  own.  Who  had  the  right  to  command  him  to  yield  it?  The 
free  air  around  him  was  his  wall,  and  he  who  sought  to  drive  him 
further  embraced  the  peril  of  his  own  lawlessness.  Nor  was  the 
prisoner  required  to  wait  for  the  development  of  McKaig's  designs 
upon  him;  lie  already  had  full  notice.  No  shot  or  blow  was  neces- 
sary to  make  them  clearer,  lie  had  the  right  to  presume  the 
bloody  intentions  of  McKaig  from  his  previous  as  well  as  his  pres- 
ent movements,  and  to  act  with  promptitude.  This  is  the  law  of 
the  courts,  and  is  sustained  by  the  authority  of  reason.  In  it  lies 
all  the  safety  bestowed  by  the  great  principles  of  self-defense.  The 
whole  panorama  of  the  past  flashed  upon  the  mind  of  the  prisoner 
at  a  glance,  and  called  upon  him  to  defend  life,  honor,  sister,  and 
home  without  the  delay  of  an  instant.  There  was  the  destroyer, 
the  insulter,  and  now  the  threatening  assailant. 

After  carefully  examining  and  comparing  the  testimony  I  think 


FOR  KILLING  COLONEL  W.  VV.  M'KAIG,  JR.      133 

any  candid  mini  will  agree  that  as  the  deceased  stepped  upon  the 
side-walk  in  front  of  the  prisoner,  they  simultaneously  drewtheit 

pistols.  There  are  six  witnesses  who  prove  that  McKaig  had 
drawn  when  J51aek  fired  and  two  of  them  were  brought  here, 
though  not  sworn,  by  the  prosecution.  The  same  number  or 
more  saw  the  pistol  fall  from  his  hand  as  the  prisoner's  first  shot 
took  effect.  The  cane  fell  from  the  other  hand  at  the  same  time. 
As  the  evidence  shows,  the  ball  had  taken  effect  in  the  side  and 
had  ranged  near  the  spine,  prod ucinga shock  to  the  nervous  and 
muscular  systems.  The  prisoner  had  been  able  to  lire  quicker 
than  his  antagonist  from  the  fact  that  his  pistol,  as  you  have  seen 
here,  is  self-cocking. 

It  is  contended,  however,  that  the  deceased  had  not  drawn,  be- 
cause Dr.  Smith  and  some  others  did  not  see  the  weapon  in  his 
hand,  nor  see  it  fall  to  the  ground.  This  is  no  proof  at  all;  it  is 
of  a  character  which  is  always  scouted  from  the  presence  of  pos- 
itive, affirmative  evidence.  What  one  man  did  not  see  is  often 
seen  by  many  others.  Instances  of  this  rule  are  very  familiar  in 
all  the' books.  In  this  case,  however,  those  witnesses  who  did  not 
see  the  pistol  in  AjcKaig's  hand,  were  also  blind  to  his  cane.  Yet 
no  one  disputes  that  he  had  the  cane.  That  is  conceded  by  all. 
They  say  they  did  not  see.  the  pistol  drop  at  the  curb-stone  when 
the  first  shot  was  fired;  but  they  admit  also  that  they  did  not  see 
the  cane  fall,  and  yet  it  is  not  denied  by  the  prosecution  that  the 
cane  fell  there.  If  this  negative  testimony  disproves  the  pistol,  it 
likewise  disproves  the  existence  of  the  cane,  although  the  cane 
and  its  fail  from  the  hand  of  the  deceased,  the  moment  he  receiv- 
ed the  prisoner's  lire,  are  accepted  tacts  in  this  case.  But  in  this 
connection,  why  was  Dr.  Ilumroelshine  not  called  by  the  prosecu- 
tion ?  A  strange  and  most  lamentable  feature  in  a  criminal  trial 
is  here  deu  loped;  it  oppresses  me  with  sorrow  and  apprehension. 
The  suppression  of  evidence  more  extensive,  systematic,  and  de- 
rate than  I  have  ever  known,  here  commences.  Dr.  Hummel- 
shine's  name  is  on  the  back  of  the  indictment  as  the  witness  on 
whose  testimony,  ano  on  whose  testimony  alone,  before  the  grand 
jury,  it  was  found.  lie  has  been  here  in  obedience  to  the  process 
of  the  State  from  the  opening  day  of  this  court  to  the  present 
hour.  Yet  the  prosecution  did  not  place  him  on  the  stand. 
The  learned  prosecutors  closed  their  case  without  submitting 
to  yon  the  evidence  on  which  the  indictment  was  procured.  Such 
an  unnatural  proceeding  of  course  fixed  our  attention  on  this 
Witness.  We  placed  him  on  the  witness  stand  before  you, 
and  then  it  was  discovered  why  he  had  been  kept  back.  lie 
saw  the  pistol  l'aH  from  the  hand  of  McKaig  at  the  curb- 
stone, into  the  gutter,  when  Black  first  fired;  thus  proving 
conclusively  that  it  was  already  drawn  for  action.  These  are 
the  words  of  the  original  witness  for  the  Mate.  Was  it  not 
the  clear,  plain  duty  of  the  prosecutors  to  call  him?  Do  they 
wish  to  obtain  a  verdict  against  this  young  man  by  hiding  me 
truth  from  you  V  Do  they  wish  to  shed  his  blood  by  fraud  V  Would 
they  encompass  his  destruction  by  low  artifice'?  What  explana- 
tion is  possible  here?  Have  they  not  denied  him  the  evidence  in 
their  own  hands  which  demonstrates  bis  innocence?  What  is  the 


13-1  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

object  of  a  trial  like  this?  [s  it  the  mere  display  of  skill  on  the  part 
of  counsel  in  obtaining  a  verdict  from  you  without  scruple  as  to 
the  means?    The  stake  here  played  for  isa  human  life;  does  the 

State  of  Maryland  demand  its  sacrifice  with  only  a  partial  knowl- 
edge on  your  part  of  the  circumstances  that  have  put  it  in  jeop- 
ardy? I  appeal  to  you;  you  represent  this  noble  commonwealth 
to-day;  you  have  been  mocked  and  trifled  with;  you  wanted  the 
whole  truth  and  yon  had  not  received  it  when  the  prosecution 
!  closed  and  rested.  They  kept  hack  a  vital  part  and  hoped  that 
we  would  never  find  it.  Have  you  a  favorable  regard  for  such 
a  prosecution?  Does  it  commend  itself  to  you?  Those  who  ask 
and  demand  a  verdict  against  the  life  of  a  fellow-mortal  should 
do  so  with  clean  hands  and  pure  hearts.  I  aim  to  say  nothing 
unkind  of  counsel,  but  not  for  all  the  land  that  lies  between  the 
swelling  waves  Qf  the  two  oceans  would  1  strive  for  the  convic- 
tion of  a  human  Vicing,  concealing  at  the  same  time  within  my 
own  mind  a  fact  which  would  justly  acquit  him  if  made  known 
to  the  jury.  Where,  also,  was  young  Clark,  the  boy  brought  here 
with  so  much  pains  by  those  who  inspire  the  private  branch  of 
the  prosecution?  You  did  not  hear  him  testify  until  we  put  him, 
another  State's  witness,  on  the  stand,  lie  saw  McKaig's  second 
pistol  drop  from  the  relaxed  muscles  of  his  hand  when  he  fell. 
Out  of  the  mouths  of  its  own  chosen  supporters  this  piosecutioo 
stands  condemned,  and  Crawford  Black  stands  justified.  But 
more  than  all  this;  y&u  were  not  allowed  by  the  State  to  know 
that  the  deceased  was  armed  at  all,  that  he  tiad  a  single  weapon 
upon  him.  The  learned  counsel  for  the  State  ceased  ttieir  exam- 
ination without  suffering  a  word  or  a  hint  of  the  truth  on  that 
point  to  reach  your  ears.  Yet  they  were  possessed  of  all  knowl- 
edge in  relation  to  it.  They  not  only  knew  the  evidence  of  ttum- 
melshine  as  to  the  pistol  at  the  curb-stone  of  the  south  side-walk, 
but  that  another  was  also  found  by  his  side  when  he  was  raised 
up  in  the  middle  of  the  street,  and  the  third  was  yet  remaining 
in  the  holster  of  his  belt.  He  was  carried  into  Dr.  Smith's  office, 
where  his  heavily  armed  condition  was  disclosed;  yet  the  doctor 
was  not  called  in  chief;  only  in  rebutting,  when  we  had  proven 
all  the  facts  that  were  within  his  knowledge  by  others.  Then  the 
brother  of  the  deceased,  Mervin  McKaig,  appears  next  in  this 
wholesale  suppression  of  proof.  He  took  his  brother's  belt  and 
pistols  and  disappeared.  Turney  picked  up  one  in  the  street ,  a 
man,  whose  name  was  unknown  to  the  witness  Hall,  picked  up 
the  other,  and  the  holster  yet,  contained  the  third.  Why  was 
Mervin  McKaig  made  to  remain  silent  in  your  presence  from 
day  to  day  throughout  this  entire  trial? 

This  is  Without  a  parallel  in  the  annals  of  criminal  jurispru- 
dence. 1  candidly  and  firmly  believe  that  it  is  utterly  without 
precedent,  in  English  or  American  history.  The  man  who  be- 
came the  keeper  of  those  weapons  of  death,  and  who  alone  can  tell 
their  exact  condition  when  tiie  deceased  tell,  sits  before  you  for 
two  weeks,  and  opens  not  his  mouth.  The  presumptions  are  all 
/  against  a  proceeding  like  this.  Evidence  that  is  suppressed  is 
j  presumed  to  be  injurious  to  those  who  suppress  it.  This  is  an 
ancient  maxim  of  the  law  as  well  as  a  proverb  of  wisdom.      You 


FOE,   KILLING    COLONEL    W.    \Y.    M'KAIG,   JR.  135 

have  a  right  to  know  the  condition  of  those  pistols  immediately 
after  the  fatal  affray.  Were  they  all  loaded,  or  had  one  barrel 
been  discharged  from  the  first  or  second  one  in  the  street?  Ts  that 
the  reason  that  Mervin  McKaig  made  no  explanation  here?    The 

defendant  has  the  right  to  that  presumption.  The  law  gives  it  to 
him  and  you  will  nor  strive  to  withhold  it.  ft  is  said  that  four 
shots  were  fired  and  that  the  prisoner  fired  them  all.  Possibly  it 
is  so,  but  it  would  have  been  much  easier  to  decide  it'  die  arms  of 
the  deceased  had  undergone  the  proper  inspection  and  the.  result 
been  detailed  to  yon.  There  is  a  dark  and  cloudy  spot  here;  all  is 
not  plain  and  fair;  there  is  something  to  conceal  and  it  is  done. 
Two  pistols  have  been  produced  here  in  the  rebutting  testimony 
as  those  of  McKaig.  How  are  they  identified?  Dr.  Smith  simply 
says  they  look  like  those  he  saw.  Mervin  McKaig,  then,  as  now, 
present,  could  have  removed  all  doubt  by  a  word,  but  that  word 
he  did  not  speak.  This  strange  and  astounding  plan  for  the  con- 
viction of  a  man  by  the  suppression  of  facts,  however,  does  not 
stop  even  here.  Will  some  one  tell  me  why  Turney  has  remained 
dumb  in  this  case  ?  lie  has  been  here  all  the  time,  subpeenied  by 
the  State,  and  doubtless  ready  to  do  his  duty  if  permitted  by 
those  who  brought  him  here.  Several  persons  have  testified  that 
he  was  seen  to  take  a  pistol  from  the  street  after  the  deceased 
was  removed.  His  name  has  been  repeated  over  and  over  again  in 
your  hearing,  and  the  fact  that  he  himself  was  not  brought  for- 
ward to  explain  his  own  conduct  and  to  inform  you  of  the  condi- 
tion in  which  lie  found  that  fire-arm  is  damning  and  overwhelm- 
ing to  this  prosecution.  You  should  not  move  a  single  step 
toward  a  conviction.  You  should  not  even  consider  the  testi- 
mony produced  for  that  purpose.  You  should  stop  at  the  very 
threshold  and  say  to  the  State:  ''You  have  withheld  vital  and 
important  facts  tiiat  were  under  your  control;  yon  have  not  dealt 
fairly  with  us  or  with  the  prisoner  at  the  bar,  and  yet  you  ask  us 
to  imbrue  our  hands  in  his  blood.  We  decline  and  utterly  refuse  , 
to  join  in  such  practice  and  we  dismiss  your  proposition  as  an 
insult  to  our  intelligence  and  sense  of  justice." 

But  it  has  been  urged,  and  will  be  again,  that  after  tin;  first  shot 
the  prisoner  might  with  safety  have  ceased  tiring  before  he  did. 
The  perforated  coat  will  be  displayed  in  your  sight,  and  a  tongue, 
of  vengeance,  made  to  speak  from  every  rent.  But  if  Black  had 
reason  to  believe  that  McKaig  was  seeking  his  lite,  and  was  amply 
prepared  to  take  it,  at  what  point  of  the  conflict  was  he  to  pause, 
and  say  that  the  future  was  secure?  lie  had  seen  the  deceased 
come  to  meet  him.  lie  witnessed  the  shifting  of  the  cane,  the 
right  hand  in  deadly  preparat  ion  upon  the  p  stol,  and  the  act  of 
drawing,  all  before,  he  commenced  his  defense.  Was  anything 
more  needed  to  convince  him  that  the  awful  moment,  had  arrived 
when  one  or  the  other  must  fall;  when  the  light  was  to  he  to  tin; 
death?  Ami  with  such  bio  uly  hostility  proclaimed  by  the  de- 
ceased the  prisoner  was  not  required  to  cease  the  stiife  that  had 
been  forced  upon  him  until  he  knew  that  his  adversary  was  dis- 
abled and  rendered  incapable  of  further  attack.  Such  is  the  writ- 
ten law  of  tin:  land  as  administered  in  its  courts  of  justice.  I  an- 
nounce this  in  the  hearing  of  their  honors  on  the  bunch  as  one  of 


v 


136  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

the  great  cardinal  doctrines  of  self-defense.  Without  it.  indeed, 
there  would  be  no  self-defense.  It  would  bo  a  delusion  and  a 
snare.  When,  therefore,  McKaig,  as  described  by  George  Garner, 
sprang  into  the  street  after  the  first  lire,  and  put  his  hand  behind 
as  if  to  draw  another  weapon,  Bla  sk  had  no  reason  to  believe  that 
his  life  was  yet  safe  lie  could  not  know  that  the  deceased  was 
hit  at  all.  lie  still  stood  ami  endeavored  to  continue  the  fight 
with  the  abundant  means  that  were  upon  him.  There  was  no 
security  or  peace  for  the  prisoner  until  McKaig  fell.  If  Mc- 
Kaig  moved  from  Black,  the  evidence  shows  that  it  was  only 
for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  time  and  opportunity  to  draw  a 
second  m'stol.  Under  these  circumstances,  was  the  prisoner  to 
cease  firing  and  allow  the  deceased  to  turn  and  fire  upon  him 
when  he  got  ready?  The  deceased,  in  fact,  did  turn,  and  fell 
with  his  face  toward  the  prisoner  and  with  the  pistol,  afterward 
found  by  his  side,  in  his  hand.  His  arm  had  become  nerveless, 
and  it  was  too  late  for  him  to  execute  the  last*urpose  of  his  life. 
And  as  he  fell,  the  last  scene  in  a  long  dramaof  secret  sin  and 
open  shaine,  of  private  grief  and  public  ruin,  was  closed  by  the 
sudden  pall  of  death.  But  as  that  stalwart  form  lay  there  under 
the  early  sun  of  that  mornings  and  as  the  liberated  spirit  ascended 
to  the  great  fountain  of  life  on  high,  what  accusing  word  of  guilt 
could  it  bear  to  the  dread  presence  of  a  righteous  God  against 
Crawford  Black?  Wherein  is  his  offense  against  the  laws  of  man 
or  the  majesty  of  heaven?  Would  you  have  had  him  avoid  the 
encounter  that  was  sought;  abandon  his  right  to  the  highway  and 
turn  and  flee  from  the  face  of  his  enemy?  The  laws,  human  and 
divine,  make  no  such  demand,  nor  does  the  history  of  your  State. 
The  fame  of  Maryland  is  glorious  and  full  of  honor  in  peace  and  in 
war.  She  is  a  child  of  the  Revolution,  and  its  baptism  of  tire  and 
blood  rested  upon  her  head.  Her  sons  are  reputed  brave,  and  her 
daughters  beautiful  and  virtuous,  wherever  her  name  is  spoken. 
The  Maryland  line  met  the  scarlet  uniform  and  the  glittering  steel 
of  England,  from  the  darker  hours  of  Bunker  Hill  to  the  trium- 
phant glory  of  Yorktown,  in  behalf  of  personal  as  well  as  national 
independence.  With  what  pride  you  can  point  to  that  long  and 
brilliant,  though  bloody  record;  it  has  extorted  terms  of  eulogy 
from  the  pens  of  even  reluctant  historians  and  commanded  the 
admiration  of  posterity.  Nor  has  her  soil  in  modern  times  bred 
the  spirit  of  cowardice.  She  has  not  infused  it  into  the  veins  of 
her  children,  and  no  dastards  example  is  in  her  escutcheon  to 
temp  the  prisoner  to  flight  and  dishonor,  ilebutstoad  his  ground 
as  his  fathers  did  before  him  against  the  armed  destroyer  of  life 
and  the  ravager  of  peaceful  homes. 

At  this  stage,  however,  of  this  dark  and  melancholy  affair  the 
bitter  cry,  wrung  at  last  from  the  prisoner's  heart,  is  caught  up 
by  the  prosecution  and  urged  against  him.  Yes,  when  he  saw 
McKaig  fall.  Ins  lips  broke  forth  for  one  brief  utterance  as  if 
touched  by  the  spirit  of  retributive  justice,  lie  thought  no  moro 
of  his  own  danger;  he  was  uncoisciousof  the  peril  of  his  own  life 
as  the  image  of  his  poor  sister,  torn  from  her  high  estate  of  virtue, 
and  then  spurned  and  trampled  upon,  rose  before  his  inflamed 
Vision.     It  is  said  that  the  dying  have  a  swift  and  far  reaching 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    V,  .    M  KAIG,    JR.  137 

glance  of  the  realms  and  records  of  time,  but  not  moresothan 
this  prisoner  at  that  supreme  instant  had  of  the  pure-faced  play- 
mate of  his  childhood,  now  the  prey,  the  sport,  and  the  scorn  of 
human  perfidy;  once  wandering  by  his  side,  in  the  early  dawn  of 
their  lives,  then  expanding  into  womanhood  like  a '"(lower  in 
flushing,  when  blightingwas  nearest, "then  plucked  by  theruthless 
hand  of  the  seducer  from  the  garden  of  honor  and  (Inner  away  in 
a  little  while,  withered  and  dead.  He  beheld,  too,  the  sweet,  bright 
home  of  other  days  when  Ins  loving  mother  smiled  in  her  narrow, 
but  happy  and  untainted  domestic  circle;  when  her  days  and 
nights  were  not  idled  with  weeping  and  her  face  was  not  furrowed 
with  tears;  when  her  voice  was  not  lifted  up  with  lamentations 
more  bitter  than  "the  wail  above  the  dead;11  when  his  father's 
brow  was  not  bent  before  the  gaze  of  men  because  the  deceased 
had  covered  it  with  the  mildew  of  shame;  when  he  himself  looked 
forth,  upon  the  enticing  career  of  manhood  with  a  proud,  high 
heart  and  an  unblemished  name.  All  this  came  as  a  Hash  upon 
memory,  illuminating  all  the  dear  objects  of  his  existence  and 
then  giving  way  as  suddenly  to  the  worse  than  midnight  darkness 
of  the  present  hour.  In  the  twinkling  of  an  eye  all  was  changed, 
and  home,  and  sister,  and  father,  and  mother,  and  Ins  own  youth- 
ful hopes  and  pride  all  lay  together  before  his  eyes  in  a  heap  of 
ruin  and  misery.  The  imprisoned  pangs  of  his  soul  burst  forth, 
and  he  spoke  the  fulfillment  of  human  and  divine  justice.  He 
announced  the  execution  of  the  decrees  of  God  an  1  man;  he  pro- 
claimed the  fate  of  the  man  who  had  ruined  his  sister,  and  pur- 
sued her  father  as  a  felon  because  he  resented  her  destruction. 
Though  his  own  life  had  been  assailed,  though  he  had  justly  stood 
upon  his  defense,  yet  his  tongue  gave  the  true  interpretation  of 
the  reason  that  his  adversary  had  fallen.  "The  wages  of  sin  is 
death,"  and  they  had  been  earned  and  were  now  paid.  Am  I  told 
that  there  is  no  law  by  which  he  who  rides  a  home  of  its  most  pre- 
cious treasures  shall  be  slain?  Am  I  told  that  the  pr-isoncr  announced 
a  sentiment  for  which  he  should  die  when  he  declared  his  sister's 
nun  to  be  the  cause  of  that  bloody  scene?  With  magnanimity 
he  waived  all  considerations  of  himself,  and  thought  only  of  those 
dearer  to  him  than  life.  Tor  this  shall  he  sup  the  horrors  of  a 
conviction  at  your  hands?  What  more  did  he  do,  even  if  no  prin- 
ciple of  self-defense  shielded  him,  than  others  have  done  in  every 
age  and  in  every  clime?  The  christian  and  the  pagan  tribes  of  men 
alike  give  him  their  examples  and  their  support.  Examine  all  that 
is  left,  all  that  can  be  found  in  every  distinctive  period  of  history 
since  the  great  flood  of  mankind  commenced  to  flow  from  a  single 
family  in  the  morning  of  Lime,  and,  with  the  exception  of  now  and 
then,  a  licentious  reign  like  that  of  Charles  1 1  of  England,  where 
the  object  was  to  cheapen  female  virtue  and  license  Uie  unbridled 
lust  of  the  court  and  its  infamous  favorites,  ^ou  can  find  no  prece- 
dent for  the  punishment  of  the  prisoner,  no  authority  to  lay  your 
hands  upon  Uie  defender  of  your  liresidesand  the  protect  or  of  your 
homes  against  the  common  enemy  of  the  human  race.  And  i  here, 
in  this  solemn  presence,  with  the  dread  issues  of  life  and  death  in- 
trusted to  my  care,  declare  as  far  as  my  voice  will  reach,  that  he 
who  invades  the  sanctuary  of  a  home,  imposes  the  impurity  of  his 


138  TIL :  BARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

debased  and  brutal  desires  upon  the  presence  of  innocence,  breaks 
the  charm  and  halo  of  virtue,  and  denies  the  altar  of  dom 
life,  forfeits  his  right  of  abode  in  t  he  midst  of  human  society,  and 
deserves  to  die.  The  husband's  hand  is  thrice  armed  for  his  de- 
struction, the  father  rises  against  him  in  paternal  majesty,  and  the 
brother  may  scourge  him  from  the  face  of  the  earth  wherever  he  is 
found.  His  offense  is  beyond  the  reach  of  pardon,  and  appeals  to 
heaven  and  earth  combined  for  redress.  It,  is  rank  with  crime, 
and  invites  t  he  lash  of  chast  isement  from  every  virtuous  quarter. 
Nor  is  this  doctrine,  without  that  same  powerful  sanction  of  which 
the  mighty  common  law  of  England  was  born.  That  vast  and 
splendid  structure  is  simplv  the  offspring  of  the  customs,  and 
usages  of  the  people  of  the  British  empire,  its  broad  and  endur- 
ing foundations  rest  upon  the  long  com  inued  habits  and  practices 
of  an  enlightened  race  and  nation.  It  springs  from  the  consent 
and  approval  of  centuries.  Has  not  the  principle  for  which  I  con- 
tend the  same  great  support?  Is  it  not  a  common  law  within 
itself,  the  eldest  born  of  all  laws,  ante-dating  the  d  tysof  Edward, 
the  Confessor,  and  Alfred,  the  Law-Giver,  as  wide  spread  as  the 
light  of  history,  and  as  universal  as  the  nations  of  the  earth?  Has 
it  not  the  sanction  of  Jehovah  himself  in  the  case  I  cited  from  the 
pages  of  sacred  history?  Did  it  not  blaze  forth  from  the  heights 
of  .Sinai  to  the  uttermost  boundaries  of  space  and  time?  The 
death  of  the  seducer  and  the  adulterer  was  decreed  in  the  high 
courts  of  heaven  when  the  ages  were  in  their  infancy,  and  tin; 
decision  lias  been  followed  wherever  the  marriage  couch  lias  hern 
spread  and  the  family  tie  has  been  woven.  The  usages  of  civiliza- 
tion, the  uniform  conduct  of  men  at  the  same  moment  of  time, 
and  in  different  and  distant  parts  of  the  globe;  the  rulings  of 
judicial  tribunals,  and  above  all,  the  unvarying,  unbroken  chain 
of  verdicts  rendered  by  juries  since  the  beginning  of  human  juris- 
prudence have  all  combined  to  establish  and  consolidate  the  fatal 
but  just  decree.  Modern  ages  have  lent  their  sanction  to  the  cus- 
toms of  antiquity.  Tue  span  of  our  own  live-  in  these  latter  days 
is  crowded  with  illustrations  of  the  great  truth  which  1  Jay  before 
you.  American  history  has  its  faithful  story  to  tell,  as  well  as 
the  annals  of  the  family  in  Israel,  and  of  every  civilized  coast 
and  tribe  from  that  hour  until  the  present  day. 

A  quarter  of  a  century  ago  there  occurred  in  Philadelphia,  the 
city  of  meek  and  peaceful  antecedents,  a  full  and  perfect  test  of 
this  common  law  of  homicide  where  a  seducer  is  slain.  The  bin- 
gleton-Mercer  case  rang  out  upon  the  ear  of  the  world  as  a  note 
of  safety  to  the  young  and  confiding  members  of  virtuous  homes, 
and  of  warning  to  those  polluted  and  polluting  vvretcnes  who  look 
upon  woman  in  the  same  debasing  spirit  with  which  S  ttan,  prowl- 
ing amidst  the  splendors  and  the  innocence  of  Paradise,  looked 
and  leered  with  lustful  eyes  upon  the  unsuspicious  and  angelic 
movements  of  .Eve.  No  ingredient  of  sell -defense  was  there.  The 
bald  and  naked  issue  was  presented.  Tue  arm  of  the  brother  was 
made  naked,  and  his  right  hand  red  in  the  defense  of  his  sister's 
honor,  and  a  jury  of  the  vicinage  and  a  jury  of  the  world  acquitted 
him  with  universal  acclaim.  Tue  District  of  (Joluinoia  has  the 
case  of  Jarboe  with  the  same  uueering  aud  pmiosopaie  result. 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    fll'KAia,    JR.  139 

California  spoke  within  the  last  two  years;  and  the  great  central 
State  of  Oli io  makes  her  recent  contribution  in  the  caseof  Mc- 
Quigg  and  his  sister.  I  might  multiply  unt  il  I  would  degenerate 
into  the  simple  narrator  of  a  catalogue  of  events  and  names  well 
known  to  you  all.  And  when  we  mount  up  to  the  unclouded 
regions  of  impartial  reason  and  natural  right  why  Should  not  this 
rule  against  vice  and  on  the  side  of  virtue  prevail?  What  miti- 
gation can  he  offered  for  the  conduct  of  the  most  evil  monster 
produced  from  the  lowest  and  most  depraved  elements  of  our 
fallen  humanity?  Can  his  crime  be  lessened  or  brightened  by 
comparison  with  any  other  that  darkens  our  brief  pilgrimage  be- 
neath the  stars?  If  the  door  or  window  of  your  house  is  broken, 
for  an  article  of  the  meanest  value,  you  may  take  the  life  of  the 
burglar.  It  is  only  your  house  and  its  material  contents  that  are 
in  danger,  but  so  tender  is  the  regard  of  the  written  law  for  prop- 
erty that  you  may  arise  and  slay  to  defend  it.  Do  your  dwellings 
contain  nothing  more  valuable  and  sacred  than  silver  and  gold? 
Are  there  not  gems  this  moment  in  the  circle  of  your  households, 
whose  luster  you  would  not  have  tarnished  or  their  presence  torn 
away  for  all  the  glittering  treasures  of  the  G-olcondas,  the  Cali- 
fornias.and  the  Perns?  Wives,and  daughters,  and  Sisters  are  there, 
and  the  loss  of  one  to  the  embrace  of  dishonor  would  rend  your 
hearts  in  twain,  and  plant  a  poison  in  the  cup  of  life  which  would 
never  cease  to  rankle  until  the  grave  gave  you  peace.  Yet  it  is 
contended  that  for  the  criminal  monster  who  might  thus  destroy 
all  for  which  you  live,  and  make  life  itself  one  Long  continued 
and  unbearable  anguish,  there  is  no  personal  punishment,  no  pain 
for  him  to  suffer;  that  he  may  walk  your  streets  in  peace  and 
security,  and  spend  his  days  in  ease  and  comfort  while  his  victim, 
pale  and  wasted  with  sorrow,  is  sinking  into  an  untimely  grave 
in  some  lonesome  and  secluded  spot  where  she  lies  hidden  from 
the  unpitying  eves  and  unfeeling  scoffs  of  the  world.  His  crime 
is  a  thousand  fold  blacker  than  murder,  yet  there  are  no  prisons 
or  scaffolds  for  him.  For  the  betrayed  and  ruined  woman  there  is 
nothing  left  of  life  except  the  pain  of  living.  The  joy  of  existence 
never  comes  again.  When  we  see  the  autumn  leaf  falling  to  the 
ground,  and  the  white  shroud  of  winter  spread  over  the  face  of 
the  lields  we  are  blest,  with  the  certain  hope  that  the  soft  air 
of  spring  will  after  a  little  while  come  back  to  us  and  renew  in 
our  midst  the  splendors  of  this  beautiful  world;  that  the  fresh, 
green  sward,  adorned  with  flowers,  will  again  spread  at  our  feet, 
and  the  deep  foliage  id'  the  forest  will  weave;  its  bright  canopy 
over  our  heads.  But  t  o  the  soul  that  has  loved,  trusted,  and  lost, 
there  comes  no  second  spring.  The  solemn  sky  of  autumn  and  the 
chilling  winds  of  winter  alone  remain  to  her.  No  glad  and  golden 
suinmer  awaits  her  in  the  future.  A  scorched  and  barren  desert 
without  verdure,  withoul  tree,  or  plant,  or  blossom,  or  shrub,  or 
one  single  cooling  fountain  at  which  to  rest  in  all  the  desolate  pil- 
grimage, lies  before  her  tired  and  faltering  footsteps.  She  makes 
the  rest  of  her  journey,  too,  alone.  The  lepers  taint  is  upon  her 
in  the  eyes  of  the  world  and  friends  fall  i<\\  and  avert  then  (aits. 
And  with  such  a  spectacle  as  this  before  you,  are  you  willing  £o 
say  that  the  man  wiio  thus  curses  the  entire  existence  of  one  wiio.se 


1-10  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

sole  offense  has  been  her  Mini],  unreasoning  devol  ion  to  him  should 
pass  unscathed  and  unwhipped  of  jusl  ice  ?  Such  a  decision  would 
spurn  and  trample  under  yourfeet  the  holiest  and  tenderest  in- 
terests, affections,  and  loves  of  humanity,  and  would  blaspheme 
all  the  attributes  of  a  just  and  righteous  God.  Does  some  one, 
however,  who  is  careful  of  the  life  of  the  destroyer  profane  this 
subject  with  asuggestionof  damages  asa  measureof  legal  redress? 
The  bare  thought  stifles  an  elevated  nature  with  feelings  of  loath- 
ing and  disgust.  Who  can  estimate  the  value  of  family  honor? 
Who  shall  lay  a  price  on  domestic  happiness?  Who  shall  remu- 
nerate you  for  the  stolen  and  defiled  members  of  your  household  ? 
As  well  might  you  attempt  to  fix  the  value  of  a  lost  and  ruined 
soul  in  hell.  "What  will  a  man  not  give  for  his  own  soul,"  and 
will  he  not  give  the  same,  or  even  a  higher  ransom,  if  need  be,  for 
the  salvation  of  wife,  mother,  daughter,  and  sister V  Without 
them,  in  their  purity,  the  regions  of  time  and  earth  would  be  filled 
with  fiery  tortures,  and  the  condition  of  the  fallen  spirits  in  eter- 
nity could  be  no  worse.  Can  you  pay  the  husband  for  his  wife,  the 
son  for  his  mother,  the  brother  for  his  sister,  and  the  father  for 
his  daughter  ?  Can  you  make  atonement  to  the  heart-broken  wo- 
man herself  for%iolated  vows  and  wanton  perfidy?  Can  she  or 
any  of  those  that  l><ve  her  be  redeemed  to  their  original  estate  by 
the  assessment  of  damages  ?  A  division  of  property  between  the 
so  ial  outlaw  and  his  prey  may  be  just,  but  as  a  mode  of  punish- 
>ueiit  it  is  vain  and  void  of  meaning.  Who, also,  would  have  such 
gain  ?  If  a  judgment  was  taken  in  favor  of  the  husband  or  father, 
in  whose  behalf  an  action  lies,  what  a  revolting  acquisition  to  his 
fortune  it  would  be  ?  in  what  way  would  he  expend  it?  If  the 
husband  invests  it  in  "ships  that  go  down  to  the  sea,"  he  makes 
his  ventures  into  foreign  lands  and  distant  waters  upon  the  wages 
rendered  to  him  by  a  jury  for  his  wife's  infamy,  lie  traflics  upon 
the  honor  of  her  whose  dear  and  precious  head  once  laid  in  its 
sweet  sleep  of  fidelity  upon  his  confiding  heart.  If  his  argosies 
come  home  from  successful  voyages  they  are  freighted  with  gains 
founded  upon  the  dishonor  of  his  bed,  the  debasement  of  his  name, 
and  the  overthrow  of  all  his  fireside  gods.  His  bills  of  lading  stare 
at  him  as  the  reward  of  his  submission  to  the  lowest  depths  of  deg- 
radation ever  fathomed  by  the  most  abject  spirits  of  the  human 
race.  The  articles  of  merchandise,  which  he  unpacks  and  offers 
in  exchange  at  his  counter,  would  salute  him  with  the  taint  of 
moral  deatti  and  remind  him  perpetually  of  Ins  hideous  bereave- 
ment. The  ghost  of  his  murdered  peace  would  arise  and  confront 
him  wherever  he  turned. 

It  the  father  accepted  a  pecuniary  award  for  the  shame  of  his 
daughter,  it  would  bitterly  mock  him  in  all  the  after  years.  In 
what  channel  of  trade  would  he  embark  with  the  proceeds  ?  If  he 
bartered  them  for  lands,  his  growing  meadows,  his  waving  corn, 
his  ripening  wheat,  and  the  flocks  and  herds  upon  his  hills  would 
seem  to  be  flourishing  over  the  dishonored  tomb  of  his  lost  and 
undone  child.  His  soul  would  sicken  at  the  sight  of  his  own  pros- 
perity springing  from  such  a  source.  He  would  turn  away,  and 
lliough  tilled  with  the  peaceful  precepts  of  our  holy  religion,  he 
would  invoke  the  death  of  the  seducer  and  pray  for  the  blessings 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL   W.    W.    m'kAIG,   JR.  141 

of  heaven  to  rest  upon  the  hand  that  smites  him  in  his  career  of 
wickedness.  This  is  the  universal  law  of  the  human  heart,  and 
the  prisoner  at  the  bar  simply  proclaimed  it  when  lie  slew  the  de- 
ceased. Such  is  the  meaning  of  his  exclamation  when  tried  by  all 
the  experience,  instincts,  and  reason  of  mankind. 

And  now,  gentlemen,  my  labors  are  drawing  to  a  close.  I  have 
endeavored  to  treat  plainly  and  fairly  all  the  material  aspects  of 
this  painful  and  most  important  case.  If  there  is  guilt  in  the  con- 
duct of  the  prisoner,  T  have  not  found  it.  Soon  you  will  discharge 
the  most  momentous  duty  of  your  lives.  In  a  few  hours  more  you 
will  determine  whether  Crawford  Black  shall  live  or  die.  There 
is  no  intermediate  point  for  one  like  him.  If  he  is  guilty  at  all,  he 
tells  me  to  say  to  you  that  he  anxiously  and  earnestly  desires  the 
extreme  and  fatal  penalty  of  the  law.  I  join  in  that  solemn  and 
awful  request.  That  untainted  and  unsullied  spirit  must  not  herd 
with  hardened  felons,  or  taste  the  fearful  degradation  of  the  pen-  | 
itentiary.  The  odious  garb  of  the  prison  was  not  made  for  such 
a  form  as  his.  Far  rather  would  I  bid  him  farewell  forever  on  the 
scaffold  than  to  know  that  he  lived  with  the  stain  of  infamy  upon 
him.  But  I  will  not  indulge  in  such  gloomy  forebodings.  I  be- 
lieve that  you  approach  a  cheerful  and  pleasing  task.  I  believe 
that  your  faces  will  be  radiant  with  happiness  as  you  restore,  the 
prisoner  to  life,  liberty,  and  the  embrace  of  his  weeping  parents. 
They  reach  forth  their  eager  arms  to  carry  him  home.  They  have 
been  lonely,  very  lonely  there  for  manymonths.  This  mother  has 
wept  like  Rachel  for  her  children  because  they  were;  not.  One  has 
been  taken,  the  spoiler's  prey;  you  will  not  take  the  other  also.  As 
the  aged  father  in  Israel  clung  to  Benjamin  when  Joseph  was  gone, 
so  dothese  afflicted  parents  yearn  for  their  good  and  dutiful  son, 
and  long  to  clasp  him,  free  and  unharmed,  to  their  bereaved 
breasts.  In  full  confidence  that  by  your  verdict  you  will  grant 
this  blessed  privilege,  reunite  this  broken  family,  and  solace  theii 
wounded  hearts,  as  far  as  it  may  be  done  by  human  power,  I  sur- 
render all,  all  into  your  hands.  Accept  my  thanks,  each  one  of 
you,  for  your  kind  and  patient  attention;  and  allow  me  to  tender 
you  my  best  wishes  for  your  future  welfare  and  happiness. 


ARGUMENT 

OF 

HON.  MILTON  WHITNEY. 


Mat  it  please  the  Court,  -and  you,  gentlemen  of  the 
jury,  after  the  long  and  patient  investigation  which  you  have 
given  to  the  examination  of  this  case,  involving  absence  from 
homes,  and  the  daily  avocations  of  life,  it  is  with  extreme  reluct- 
ance that  I  rise  to  trespass  any  further  upon  either  your  patience, 
or  your  time,  and  were  I  to  consult  my  own  private  convenience 
and  feelings,  I  would  submit  this  cause  into  your  hands  for  your 
final  determination.  But,  gentlemen,  I  feel  that  I  have  a  duty  to 
perform  from  the  performance  of  which  I  have  no  right  to  shrink. 
It  will  be  my  effort,  gentlemen,  and  I  trust  I  may  be  aide  to  dis- 
charge that  duty  in  such  a  spirit  of  fairness  and  candor  that  it 
may  receive  the  approbation  of  your  own  best  judgments.  I  have 
carefully  examined  the  testimonyin  this  case,  and  I  have  as  care- 
fully examined  the  principles  of  law  and  of  human  action  that,  it 
seems  to  me,  should  be  applicable  to  that  testimony,  and  my 
mind  has  arrived  at  certain  conclusions.  It  will  be  my  duty  to 
lay  before  you  the  process  and  the  grounds  upon  which  those  con- 
clusions have  been  arrived  at,  and,  if  I  am  right,  you  will  arrive 
at  the  same  conclusions.  If  I  am  wrong,  you  will  detect  the  error 
into  which  I  have  fallen.,  ftnd  be  governed  accordingly. 

Gentlemen,  by  virtue  of  the  const  itution  of  the.  State  of  Mary- 
land, guaranteeing  the  right  of  trial  by  jury,  and  by  virtue  of  the 
laws  under  which  we  live,  and  to  the  strict  and  impartial  admin- 
istration of  which  we  look  for  protection  in  all  of  the  blessings  of 
life,  liberty,  and  property,  you  have  been  separated  and  set  apart 
from  your  fellow  men;  and  the  most  important  duty  that  men  can 
be  called  upon  to  perform  in  civil  society,  this  day  devolves  upon 
you.  Acting  upon  the  solemn  responsibility  of  the  oath  you  have 
taken,  already  spread  upon  the  records  of  this  tribunal,  you  are  to 
determine  and  decide  the  issue  that  is  now  made  up  between  the 
people  of  your  .State  on  the  one  side,  and  the  prisoner  whom  you 
have  in  charge  upon  the  other.  That  issue  involves  on  the  one 
hand  the  life  or  death  of  the  prisoner  at  the  bar,  and  on  the  other 
hand  it  involve-  the  integrity  of  our  constitution,  the  vindication 
of  the  laws  under  which  we  live,  the  peace,  welfare,  and  protec- 
tion of  society  of  which  you  are  members,  and  the  fair  name  and 
reputation  of  the  community  of  which  you  forma  part.  That 
same  constitution  of  government  that  guarantees  the  right  of 
trial  by  jury,  and  lias  this  day  set  you  apart  as  its  administrators, 
announces  and  declares  that  the  end  and  design  of  all  true  gov- 


f 

FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    m'Iy'AIG.    JR.  14;j 

ernment  is  to  secure  the  existence  of  the  body-politic  to  protect 
it,  and  to  guarantee  protection  to  every  individual  member  of  that 
community  in  all  of  I  lie  blessings  of  life  and  liberl  y.  If  the  Gov- 
ernment falls  short  of  that,  it  fails  to  mount  np  to  the  standard 
of  its  required  duty;  it  falls  short  of  the  discharge  of  its  legiti- 
mate function  and  it  proves  recreant  to  the  solemn  compact  into 
which  it  lias  entered  with  every  individual  member  of  that  com- 
munity over  which  it  seeks  to  extend  its  power.  To  secure  these 
blessings,  and  thus  to  enable  government  to  accomplish  its 
great  end  and  design,  laws  are  passed  and  penalties  enacted  as  a 
part  of  those  laws,  and  the  public  peace,  and  individual  security. 
depends  on  the  observance  of  those  laws,  or  upon  the  infliction  of 
those  penalties  in  case  of  their  violation ;  and  just  in  proportion 
as  those  laws  are  observed,  or  those  penalties  inflicted  in  ease  of 
violation,  just  in  the  same  proportion  does  that  government  dis- 
charge its  duty  to  society  and  that  society  receives  its  protection, 
and  all  the  ends  and  aims  of  civil  government  are  accomplished. 

But,  gentlemen  of  the  jury,  not  only  are  these  laws  enacted  with 
these  penalties  annexed,  but  tribunals  of  justice  are  established 
in  which  those  laws  are  to  be  vindicated,  and  those  penalties  in- 
flicted in  ease  of  their  violation;  and  thus  it  is  that  we  stand  in 
this  temple  of  justice,  dedicated  to  its  administration,  each  to 
perform  his  respective  duty  under  the  solemn  responsibility  that 
he  owes,  to  his  God,  to  his  country,  and  to  himself. 

Now,  gentlemen,  leaving  with  you  these  general  observations, 
I  ask  you  to  go  with  me  a  moment  as  we  travel  backward  upou 
the  pathway  of  time,  to  the  morning  of  the  17th  of  October,  the 
morning  of  the  fatal  day  named  in  this  indictment,  Revisit  your 
sister  city  of  Cumberland;  it  is  the  hour  of  early  morn;  the  hours 
of  darkness  have  passed;  the  curtains  of  night  have  been  raised, 
and  the  ushering  in  of  the  morn  has  called  forth  men  from  their 
hours  of  retirement  to  the  stern  realities  of  active  life.  It  is  an 
hour,  gentlemen,  when  passion,  resentment,  and  revenge  should 
be  hushed  beneath  those  calmer  and  holier  thoughts  that  cluster 
around  home  and  all  its  associations.  Let  us  enter  the  dwelling 
of  the  deceased  and  make  the  acquaintance  of  the  household. 
We  behold  there  the  husband  and  the  lather;  we  behold  the  wife 
and  the  mother;  and,  beside  them,  we  behold  the  first  and  only 
pledge  of  their  sacred  union  here  on  earth.  And,  gentlemen,  that 
is  the  household  to  which  the  government  under  which  you  live, 
and  tins  laws  of  which  you  are  this  day  made  its  administrators, 
have  guaranteed  the  protection  of  which  I  have  spoken.  At  its 
head  stands  one  just  upon  the  threshold  of  active  life,  in  the  full 
vigor  of  his  manhood,  equal  to  the  emergencies  of  war  or  of  peace; 
he  stands  there  with  an  arm  strong  to  protect  tin1  rights  of  those 
whom  the  providence  of  (bid  has  placed  within  his  keeping,  and 
with  a  heart  warm  ami  large  enough  to  respond  to  all  the  duties 
growing  out  of  that  sacred  relation.  He  bids  them  his  morning 
farewell  until  ihe  hour  of  their  accustomed  meal  shall  once  111016 
reunite  them  around  their  frugal  hoard;  and  ere  the  clock  of  time 
has  ticked  its  tinny  minutes,  the  hand  of  the  assassin  has  done 
its  work.  That  wife  has  been  made  a  widow,  that  child  has  been 
orphaned,  and  that  noble  form  lies  mangled  in  the  dust.     That 


141  TRIAL   OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

ig  arm  has  been  paralyzed,  that  generous  heart  has  ceased  its 
beating,  and  that  soul,  unwarned  and  unnoticed, has  been  ushered 
into  the  presence  of  its  God.  The  mangled  remains  are  removed; 
no  need  of  a  physician;  no  need  of  kind  and  sympathizing  friends 
to  cool  the  parched  brow;  no  need  of  guardian  angels  to  watch 
around  the  dying  bed  to  convoy  that  soul  to  its  home  of  immor- 
tality on  1  ne  other  sideof  the  dark  and  turbid  stream.  That  spirit 
has  already  passed  through  the  valley,  the  footsteps  ui'  which  all 
tend  in  one  direction.  Gentlemen,  the  story  is  soon  told;  the 
undertaker  is  sent  for,  and  he  does  Ids  accustomed  work;  the  city 
is  draped  in  mourning;  its  places  of  business  are  closed,  and  the 
assembled  multitude  crowd  around  to.perform  the  last  sad  office 
i  '  respect  to  one  who  had  taken  his  first  outlook  upon  the  world  in 
that  his  native  city.  The  laborer  leaves  his  implements  of  labor;  the 
artisan,  his  workshop;  the  merchant,  his  counting-house,  and  the 
professional  man,  his  office;  each  and  all  to  join  in  the  funeral 
procession,  to  convey  one  whom  they  had  only  known  to  love,  to 
the  home  of  the  dead.  They  listen  to  the  cdods  of  the  valley  as 
theyfall  upon  the  coffin  lid,  and  return  home  appalled  at  thesight, 
and  the  widow  is  returned  to  her  desolated  hearthstone  to  spend 
the  first  night  of  her  widowhood,  and  that  child  only  to  listen  to 
the  echoes  of  its  own  voice,  as  it  calls  in  vain  upon  the  sacred  name 
of  father.  And,  gentlemen,  the  head  that  devised  and  the  hand 
that  perpetrated  this  fearful  tragedy  is  confessedly  before  you  for 
judgment. 

Gentlemen  of  the  jury,  does  the  State  of  Maryland,  do  its  peo- 
ple, does  every  household,  does  every  man,  woman,  and  child, 
every  father,  every  mother  in  the  community,  ask  too  much  at 
your  hands  when  they  ask  you  10  hold  the  acknowledged  perpe- 
trator of  such  a  deed  to  the  strictest  accountability  in  his  defense? 

Gentlemen,  whatever  considerations  may  have  been  discussed 
in  this  case,  and  how  far  soever  the  counsel  on  the  other  side  may 
have  traveled  out  of  the  record,  and  discussed  questions  of  a  col- 
lateral character,  having  no  bearing  upon  the  particular  issues 
involved,  i  beg  you  to  c  me  with  me  as  we  analyze  the  case  that 
has  been  presented  before  you  by  the  testimony  in  the  cause.  Strip 
it  of  all  its  theatrical  surroundings,  aud  let  us  lay  it  bear  and 
naked  before  you  as  an  American  jury,  and  see  where  the  truth 
and  where  the  error  is. 

Now,  gentlemem,  what  is  the  subject-matter  of  the  inquiry  that 
presents  itself  to  our  minds  at  the  very  threshold  of  this  case? 
There  has  been  a  great  deal  said — and  I  beg  you  to  bear  in  mind 
that  1  do  not  propose  to  take  any  notice  of  any  personal  allusions 
that  have  been  made,  or  be  lead  by  any  remarks  from  the  legiti- 
mate examination  of  the  case  upon  which  you  have  to  pass — there 
has  been  something  said  as  to  the  manner  in  which  this  question 
has  been  presented  to  you  by  the  introduction  of  the  testimony. 
The  same  thing  was  said  to  their  honors  upon  the  bench.  And  you 
will  bear  in  mind,  gentlemen,  that  the  Court  in  giving  a  decision 
upon  that  point,  stated  precisely  the  position  we  had  assumed, 
that  in  an  investigation  of  this  kind  it  was  incumbent  upon  the 
State  to  make  out  its  case,  and  that  the  State  in  so  doing  had  no 
right  or  power  to  anticipate  what  might  be  the  defense,  but  when 


TOR    KILLING    COLONEL   W.    W.    M'KAIGj   JR.  145 

that  case  was  made  out  on  the  part  of  the  State,  it  was  the  duty 
of  tin'  defense  then  to  show  to  the  jury,  and  to  the  satisfaction  of 
the  jury,  what  that  defense  was,  and  it  would  then  become  the 
duty  of  the  State  to  rebut  that  defense,  if  they  could,  what- 
ever that  defense  should  ho.  Therefore,  gentlemen,  so  far  as  all 
the  comments  of  the  gentlemen  on  the  other  side  are  concerned, 
in  reference  to  the  manner  in  which  this  testimony  has  been 
offered,  T  simply  refer  you  to  the  opinion  of  the  Court  when  the 
same  question  was  raised  before  that  tribunal. 

Gentlemen,  here  is  the  indictment  that  contains  the  charge 
upon  which  this  defendant  is  now  upon  his  trial.  It  is  an  indict- 
ment found  bythe  grand  inquestof  the  body  of  Alleghany  county. 
Something  has  been  said  about  the  change  of  venue  to  this  county 
by  way  of  complaint  that  you  are  now  to  try  this  case.  I  shall 
have  occasion  to  call  your  attention  to  that  branch  in  a  subsequent 
stage  of  this  investigation.  I  do  not  now  wish  to  disturb  the  order 
of  my  argument  by  callingyour  attention  to  it,  and  to  the  remarks 
that  have  been  suggested  by  counsel  on  the  other  side  now.  We  are 
then  to  look  in  the  first  place  and  ascertain  what  is  the  charge 
against  this  party!  That  charge  is  willful  murder.  It  is  not  neces- 
sary, and  I  do  not  purpose  to  consume  your  time  by  the  reading 
of  the  numerous  law  books  that  have  been  referred  to  by  the 
counsel  on  the  other  side,  or  to  go  into  that  old  ancient  commoii 
law,  of  which  they  have  bad  such  an  abhorrence,  and  yet,  to  a 
large  extent,  have  occupied  your  time  and  attention  in  reading. 
I  propose  to  do  no  such  thing.  I  shall  call  your  attention  to  the 
laws  of  Maryland  enacted  by  you  through  your  representatives, 
expressing  the.  will  of  the  sovereign  people  of  your  State. 

The  statute  law  of  Maryland  provides  that  all  murder  which 
shall  be  perpetrated  by  means  of  poison,  or  lying  in  wait,  or  by 
any  kind  of  willful,  deliberate,  and  premeditated  murder  snail  be 
murder  in  the  first  degree,  &c,  all  other,  murder  in  the  second 
degree. 

Now,  gentlemen,  I  might  go  on  and  discuss  with  you,  and  trace 
out  the  history  of  this  legislation,  and  show  you  why  and  how 
murder  was  divided  into  different  degrees,  but  I  do  not  conceive 
it  to  be  necessary  in  this  case,  and  therefore  I  shall  save  you  the 
time,  and  myself  the  exhaustion  of  so  doing.  Let  us  stay  by  the 
law  as  it  stands  out  on  our  statute  books,  enacted  by  yourselves 
through  the  agency  of  your  representatives  whom  you  have  sent 
to  express  the  will  of  the  people. 

Now,  gentlemen,  you  will  find  there  are  two  classes  of  murder  : 
"All  murder  which  shall  lie  perpetrated  by  moans  of  poison  " — es- 
tablish the  poison,  and  that  is  sufficient;  " or  lying  in  wait " — 
that  is  another  sufficient  ground;  "or,  by  any  kind  of  willful,  de- 
liberate, premeditated  killing,  shall  lie  murder  in  the  first  degree." 
This  last  means  where  the  specific   intent  to  take    life   exists. 

You  understand  me,  gentlemen,  that  at  the  common  law,  any 
person  who  took  the  lire  of  another  being  in  the  pursuit  of  a  felo- 
nious purpose,  or  With  intent  to  do  gnat  bodily  harm,  and  by 
accident,  life  was  taken,  then  that  was  murder,  although  there 
was  no  intention  to  take  life.  The  State  of  Maryland  making  the 
degree  says,  that  where  the  specific  intent  is  to  take  life,  where 


146  TRIAL   OF   HARRY   CRAWFORD   BLACK 

there  is  that  evidence  of  depravity  and  corruption  of  the  human 
heart  that  can  entertain  for  a  moment  the  idea  of  taking  human 
life,  it  shall  be  murder  in  i  he  first  degree.  Therefore,  genl  l<  men, 
in  a  case  of  this  kind,  wherever  the  investigation'  shows  the  mur- 
der to  have  been  committed  by  means  of  poison,  or  lying  in  wait, 
pr  any  kind  of  deliberal  ion  which  means  int  em  ional  killing,  then 
it  is  murder  in  the  first  degree.  The  other  kind  of  murder  is  mur- 
der in  thesecond  degree;  leaving  I  he  definition  of  murder  precisely 
as  it  existed  at  common  law;  and,  therefore,  gentlemen,  under 
the  Maryland  law,  where  a  party  is  arraigned  upon  an  indictment 
charging  him  with  murder,  a  Maryland  jury  can  find  either  one 
of  four  verdicts  :  murder  jiu  the  first,  murder  in  the  second,  man- 
slaughter, and  not  guilty. 

Now  gentlemen,  considering  what  I  have  already  stated  to  be 
'.■  sufficient  explanation  of  what  the  law  is  by  which  you  are  to  try 
this  party,  the  statute  law  of  Maryland,  by  which  rule  alone  you 
are  to  be  governed  in  the  investigation  of  the  facts,  let  us  come 
now  to  a  careful  analysis  of  what  this  case  is,  and  let  us  answer 
the  first  inquiry  that  presents  itself  to  our  mind,  k'has  the  State 
upon  its  own  showing  made  out  a  case  which  brings  it  within  the 
rule  laid  down  by  our  law,"  because  if  this  has  been  done,  and  it 
has  not  been  successfully  rebutted,  then  you  have  no  discretion 
save  to  act  upon  a  statute  law  as  it  is  written,  by  which  you  and 
I  are  bound  and  in  which  we  seek  protection  for  ourselves  and 
families. 

Gentlemen,  on  the  morning  of  this  fatal  occurrence  where  was 
Crawford  Black?  Where  was  he  first  found?  I  anticipate  for  a 
moment  here,  because  it  makes  the  connection  good.  1  anticipate 
a  portion  of  the  testimony  offered  on  the  part  of  the  defense,  so 
far  as  the  testimony  of  Mrs.  Black  is  concerned.  There  is  a  great 
deal  in  that  testimony,  gentlemen,  upon  which  I  would  like  to 
comment;  but  in  the  argument  of  this  case  I  shall  do  precisely 
what  I  did  with  her  when  she  was  on  the  stand.  I  did  not  think 
proper  to  ask  her  a  single  question;  she  was  here  as  the  mother  of 
this  party,  and  she  would  have  been  less  than  a  mother  had  she 
left  any  effort  undone  to  have  protected,  and  to  have  saved  that 
son  from  the  fearful  peril  which  now  awaits  him,  if  my  view  of 
this  case  be  correct.  Mrs.  Black  tells  you — after  nan ateing  the 
occurrences  of  the  day  before  and  the  night  before— she  tells  you 
that  her  son,  on  the  morning  of  that  day,  left  her  house.  For  what 
purpose?  She  tells  you  that  he  left,  saying  that  he  would  pay 
some  bills  which  he  had  neglected  to  pay  on  Saturday. 

Now,  gentlemen,  he  was  not  paying  bills  in  Cumberland  on 
Saturday;  he  had  been  engaged  at  Piedmont  with  his  pay-rolls, 
his  money  corresponding  to  that  pay-roll.  Where,  then, had  he  been 
engaged  in  the  making  of  those  payments  according  to  the  pay- 
rolls, in  every  case  the  money  corresponding  to  the  amount  on  the 
roll  ?  She  tells  you  that  he  left,  and  that  before  he  left  he  put  on 
an  overcoat.  Her  attention,  therefore,  was  called  to  the  overcoat. 
She  tells  you  not  only  that  her  attention  was  called  to  the  over- 
coat, but  that  he  then  told  her  that  it  was  Mr.  Henshaw's  over- 
coat. So  that  the  overcoat  upon  that  occasion,  and  at  that  time, 
was  a  subject  of  conversation  between  these  parties.    Now,  gen- 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    Jl'KAIG,    JR.  147 

tlemen.  did  lie  put  that  overcoat  on  to  go  to  the  mines?  Did  he 
put  that  overcoat  on  to  go  to  the  town,  or  village?  She  tells  yon 
that  he  started  from  that  house  with  that  overcoat  on  for  the 
purpose  of  paying  bills,  and  attending  to  the  usual  and  ordinary 
business  of  the  day.  What  kind  of  a  morning  was  it  ?  You  have 
heard  from  the  witnesses  it  was  a  warm  morning,  the  doors  and 
windows  were  open,  and  yet  he  puts  on  an  overcoat  to  go  about, 
traveling  from  place  to  place  in  that  town,  for  the  purpose  of  at- 
tending to  the  ordinary  affairs  and  business  of  life. 

Gentlemen  of  the  jury,  wheredo  you  next  find  him?  You  next  find 
him  at  Mr.  Goodman's  store;  the  clerk  tells  you  that  he  came  there 
and  that  he  was  there  about  five  minutes;  that  he  bought  somecigars, 
lighted  one,  smoked  for  a  time,  and  then  left.  And  my  distin- 
guished young  friend,  Mr.  Price,  was  very  forcible  in  his  remarks 
as  to  how  far  the  cigar  went  to  quiet  his  agitated  and  disturbed 
mind.  Therefore  if  anything  agitated  and  disturbed  the  mind  of 
Mr.  Black  at  that  time,  applying  his  counsel's  own  argument, 
those  agitations  must  have  been  reconciled  and  quieted  before  he 
left  there. 

lie  then  goesdown  to  Centre  street;  that  brings  him  past  the  foun- 
dry of  McKaig.  Now.  there  is  no  doubt  about  that.  Where  do  you 
next  see  him?  Because  now  we  are  testing  this  case;  stripping  it 
of  all  the  giddy  surroundings  with  which  it  has  been  draped. 
Where  dp  you  next  see  him?  "You  see  him  near  Mi-.  ( Iraigs'  corner, 
coming  up  Baltimore  street  from  the  direction  of  Centre  street. 
Am  I  right?  Followme  as  T  go.  He  is  seen  by  Mr.  Craig  walking  up 
slowly  on  this  pavement  until  he  got  about  opposite  this  corner, 
when  he  stopped,  apparently  looking  up  Baltimore  street.  Then 
he  turned,  he  thought,  and  either  went  into  Mr.  Dailey's store,  or 
passed  down  Mechanic  street,  which  would  again  lead  him  to  Mc- 
Kaig's  foundry. 

Now,  gentlemen,  he  had  left  Goodman's  store,  and  was  coming 
up  Centre  street;  he  passed  the  foundry  and  came  up  in  that 
direction;  there  we  see  him  through  the  eyes  of  Mr.  Craig  a  second 
time.  How  long  was  that,  before  this  shooting?  Mr.  Craig  tells 
you  it  was  at  least  half  an  hour.  Now,  where  did  he  go?  That  is 
the  next  subject-matter  of  our  inquiry.  Where  is  he  next  Seen? 
Mr.  Arrick  tells  you  that  living  upon  Centre  street,  about  half  way 
between  Baltimore  street  and  the  foundry,  as  he  was  coming  out 
of  his  house  that  morning'  to  go  to  his  work,  as  he  was  coming 
down  these,  steps,  he  took  Ins  watch  out  of  his  pocket,  and  it  was 
10  minutes  to  8  o'clock,  and  he  saw  this  man  Black  coming  up 
Centre  street,  passing  that  foundry,  lookinginto  those  windows, 
and  the  door  of  that  place.  Therefore,  gentlemen,  he  must  have 
gone  from  the  position  when  Craig  saw  him,  and  passed  down 
Mechanic  street,  gone  around  the  foundry,  and  been  there  when 
Mr.  Arrick  saw  him  looking  into  those  windows,  which  must  have 
been  the  second  time,  because  Mr.  Arrick  tells  you  that  that  was 
about  10  minutes  before  the  shooting  took  place. 

1  am  coming  down  to  details— to  facts  in  reference  to  this  case. 
We  want  to  prove  the  lying  in  wait  to  bring  it  within  the  language 
of  the  law  of  Maryland*  and  not  within  the  language  of  the  musty 
law  of  ages  gone  by,  so  much  commented  upon  hy  the  counsel  on 


148  TRIAL    OF  HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

the  other  Bide.  Where  do  wp  see  him  next?  We  see  him  n<  xi  En 
the  vestibule  of  Mr.  Shriver's  store.  What  was  he  doingthere? 
Mr.  Hughey  tells  yon  that  at  that  time  he  had  this  overcoat  on; 
that  he  had  his  hand  on  his  right  pocket,  and  that  when  he  held 
ont  his  hand  to  him  to  shake  hands  wit  b  him,  Black  extended  him 
his  loft  hand,  and  being  apparently  in  a  hurry  to  break  off  the  con- 
versation, Mr.  Hughey  says  that  he  left  him,  and  that  he  (Black) 
returned  hack  into  the  vestibule,  or  that  when  he  saw  him  last  he 
was  taking  a  step  on  to  the  vest  Ibule.  Follow  these  facts  with  me, 
because  we  desire  that  this  case  shall  be  tried  upon  the  tacts?'/; 
the  case,  and  not  facts  supposed  to  be,  and  r<  ferred  to  as  being 
in  it.  Now,  where  do  we  see  him  again?  Why,  we  see  him 
again  on  Humbrid's  corner.  You  see  (turning  to  the  plat)  that 
is  the  point  near  the  south  side  of  the  street,  Bear  in  mind,  gen- 
tlemen, that  I  am  correct  in  this  matter;  follow  me  step  by  step 
as  T  go.  AVe  find  him  on  that  corner,  by  whom?  By  Dr.  Smith,  who, 
my  friend  says,  was  very  much  excited  that  morning.  He  was  not 
excited  then;  nothing  had  occurred  to  excite  Dr.  Smith,  or  any- 
body else.  Dr.  Smith  was  passing  from  his  house  to  his  office,  and 
in  passing  down  by  there  lie  saw  Black  as  he  stood  upon  that  cor- 
ner; Black  conld  have  a  full  view  of  the  bridge,  and  this  side  ot 
the  bridge  a  full  view  up  Baltimore  street,  where  McKaig  was  ac- 
customed to  come,  walking  from  his  house  to  his  foundry.  Mark 
it,  gentlemen,  that  in  regard  to  these  facts  1  am  right.  What  does 
Dr.  Smith  say?  He  says  that  he  had  succeeded  in  reaching  his 
office;  that  he  had  gone  inside  for  a  moment,  when  his  attention 
was  attracted  by  a  remark  made  outside.  And  as  lie  went  to  the 
door  to  look  out  he  heard  the  first  shot,  and  simultaneous  with 
that  McKaig  threw  up  his  hands,  and  the  smoke  from  the  fatal 
pistol  had  not  raised  above  the  head  of  either  of  the  parties.  Now 
where  did  Black  go  when  he  left  Humbrid's  corner?  He  goes 
upon  the  south  side  of  the  street,  the  very  side  that  McKaig  always 
came;  the  very  side  that  McKaig  passed  over  to  on  that  occasion. 
Yet  the  learned  gentleman  who  last  addressed  you  in  reference  to 
this  case,  tried  to  persuade  you  that  McKaig  went  out  of  his  usual 
course  and  crossed  over  on  that  side  for  the  purpose  of  meeting 
Black,  when  all  the  evidence  goes  to  show  that  that  was  his  usual 
and  ordinary  course,  and  when  Dr.  Smith  tells  you  that  Black 
was  standing  on  this  side  of  the  street,  and  not  upon  that,  and 
therefore,  when  he  (Black)  crossed  over  it  brought  him  directly  in 
McKaig's  path. 

Now,  where,  is  that  pistol?  My  friends  have  talked  a  great  deal 
about  this  being  a  light  overcoat,  and  all  that.  It  is  perfectly 
immaterial  to  us;  you  recollect  the  testimony;  1  want  to  call  your 
attention  to  it.  My  friend,  Mr.  Syester,  stated  in  his  opening  that 
it  was  necessary  for  him  to  go  armed  to  protect  himself  in  the 
dangerous  community  in  which  he  was,  among  the  miners  ;  that 
they  were  of  a  dangerous  character,  and,  therefore,  that  it  was 
necessary  for  him  to  go  armed,  and  that  that  accounted  for  his 
being  armed  on  this  occasion. 

"  Against  miners,'"  the  very  men  that  he  has  called  before  you  to 
establish  excellency  of  character.  Gentlemen,  he  was  not  going 
to  the  mines  on  that  day.  lie  was  going  about  Cumberland  to  pay 


"FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    M  KAIG,   JR.  14'J 

bills,  to  attend  to  tlie  ordinary  transactions  of  life.  When  he  left 
his  mother's  house  with  that  overcoat  on  him,  why  did  lie  need 
the  pistol  and  the  weapon  that  was  found  on  him  at  the  time  he 
perpetrated  this  fearful  deed?  Was  it  to  protect  him  from  the 
dangerous  neighbors  by  whom  lie  was  surrounded  at  the  mines? 
He  was  not  going  there;  he  was  going  to  his  own  family  custom- 
ers  in  his  native  town  for  the  purpose  of  attending  to  the  civil 
and  ordinary  affairs  of  life,  and  yet  yon  find  him  armed  with 
a  weapon  equal  to  a  minnie  rifle,  and  carrying  it,  where?  In  the 
pocket  of  the  overcoat  that  he  had  put  on  at  his  mother's  house. 

Now,  gentlemen,  this  is  a  very  short  time  from  the  time  that 
Pr.  Smith  saw  him  upon  that  c'orner  when  this  shooting  occurred. 
That  shooting  has  been  described  to  yon,  gentlemen.  It  has 
characteristics — it  has  surroundings.  Is  it  necessary  that  I  should 
state  more  fully  the  circumstances  under  which  it  occurred?  And 
now.  gentlemen  of  the  jury,  the  question  comes  home  to  us,  has 
the  State  by  its  testimony  made  out  such  a  case  as  entitles  it  to 
ask  at  your  hands  ;i  verdict  of  guilty  for  the  crime  set  forth  in  the 
indie1  ment?  Has  thepfosecution  satisfied  you  that  there  was  in  this 
case  a  specific  intention  to  take  life,  or  that  it  was  taken  by  lying 
in  wait?  If  either,  it  is  murder  in  the  first  degree;  and,  gentlemen, 
in  addition  to  all  this  testimony  of  the  prisoner's  preparation,  the 
instrument  of  death  that  was  used,  the  manner  in  which  it  was 
held  and  concealed  upon  his  person,  looking  into  McKaig's  place 
of  business,  looking  in  recesses  past  which  McKaig  must  go,  then 
startingto  meet  him  as  soon  as  he  beholds  him  crossing  the  bridge. 
In  addition  to  all  this,  and  much  more  that  I  might  mention,  you 
have  before  you  the  terrible  manner  in  which  the  bloody  deed  was 
perpetrated.  Allowing  his  intended  victim  to  pass,  he  fires  thefirst 
shot  hack  of  the  medial  line,  he  then  follows  him  up  as  he  attempts 
to  make  his  escape,  too  much  paralyzed  to  defend  himself,  and  tires 
another  shot  in  the  hack  of  his  shoulder,  and  then,  as  his  victim  is 
falling,  fires  the  third,  which  enters  the  spinal  column,  each  of 
which  were  fatal,  and  all  of  which  were  cowards'  shots,  tired  from 

behind;  and  then  exclaims,  "You  son  of  a  b h,  you  have  got  that 

(what  for?)  for  ruining  my  sister,  and  trying  to  put  my  father  in 
the  penitentiary,  and  I  have  another  shot  for  any  d d  scoun- 
drel who  says  I  did  wrong." 

Gentlemen  of  the  jury,  was  this  the  taking  of  human  life  with 
intent  to  hill?  Had  there  been  a,  lying  in  wait?  If  either,  the 
law  of  Maryland  marks  out  your  duty,  and  you  have  no  diserel  ion. 
The  Slate  has  brought  it  within  that  law,  that  written  law,  by 
which  you  and  I  are  to  be  governed  and  controlled. 

Now,  gentlemen,  what  is  the  answer  to  this  case?  Because  you 
heard  it  announced  from  his  honor  on  the  bench,  when  the  case 
upon  the  part  of  the  State  had  been  established,  it  was  then  neces- 
sary for  t  he  defense  to  put  in  by  way  of  rebuttal,  by  way  of  excuse 
or  justification,  such  facts  as  t  hey  might  rely  upon  before  the  jury; 
and  it:  would  be  necessary,  if  they  were  put  in,  for  the  State  to  re- 
but them,  if  they  saw  proper. 

I  ask  you  now  what  is  the  excuse?  Is  a  plea,  of  just  ilication  set, 
up  here  by  this  man  l!kick,or  is  it  a  plea  that  this  occurrence  took 
place  under  such  circumstances  of  provocation  as  shall  reduce  it 


loO  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

from  what  the  law  of  Maryland  saya  is  murder  in  the  firsl  d 
to  murder  in  the  second?  What  is  the  defense?  If  the  defense  is 
that  of  self-defense  that  amounts  to  justification.  They  have 
offered  here  evidence  for  the  purpose  of  satisfying  you  that  this 
was  a  case  of  necessary  self-defense ;  they  have  offered  other  tes- 
timony for  the  purpose  of  showing  the  condition  of  mind  under 
which  the  party  was  laboring  at  the  time  he  committed  this  deed. 
For  what  purpose?  Whywasthat  testimony  offered?  It  cannot 
mouni  up  to  a  justification  unless  they  set  up  here  the  plea  of  insan- 
ity, because  no  matter  what  a  man's  feelings  maybe,  nomatterwhat 
may  be  the  condition  of  those  feelings,  or  what  may  have  caused 
them,  unless  it  mounts  up  to  that  standard  of  legal  irresponsi- 
bility thai  excuses  the  man  who  does  the  act.  Now.  that  is  not 
claimed  here,  therefore  I  am  saved  the  necessity  of  discussing  this 
question  of  insanity,  because,  in  the  offer  of  testimony,  the  coun- 
sel on  the  other  side  say  we  offer  this  testimony  to  enable  the  jury 
to^ determine  from  such  provocation  the  grade  of  homicide  com- 
mitted by  the  prisoner.  It  is  offered  then,  gentlemen,  not  as  justi- 
fication, not  as  an  excuse,  not  for  the  purpose  of  establishing  the 
plea  of  insanity,  that  is  usually  set  up  in  cases  of  this  kind,  but 
offend  for  the  purpose  of  enabling  the  jury  to  determine  from 
such  condition  of  mind  the  degree  of  murder  of  which  he  is  guilty. 

Now.  what  is  that  testimony  offered?  Here  I  come  to  a  very 
important  branch  in  the  consideration  of  this  case.  I  ask  you 
now,  gentlemen,  to  bear  with  me  for  a  few  moments  when  I  call 
your  attention  to  this  question.  What  was  the  testimony  offered 
on  the  part  of  the,  defense  for  the  purpose  of  showing  the  condi- 
tion of  this  man's  mind  at  the  time  when  he  made  the  attack 
upon  McKaig,  and  he  took  this  man's  life?  My  friends  say  that  the 
quest  ion  of  seduction  is  not  in  this  case.  Why?  They  offered  in 
evidence  a  piece  of  paper  here,  and  that  is  the  paper,  gentlemen; 
they  offered,  (showing  the  letter),  and  we  objected  to  it.  We 
objected  to  it  because  itdid  not  tend  to  prove  any  fact  in  the  cause, 
because  it  had  no  tendency  to  prove  anything.  The  question  went 
to  the  Court;  and  what  did  the  Court  say?  It  was  offered  as  a 
fact;  it  was  offered  to  follow  it  up  by  showing  that  that  fact  was 
communicated  to  Crawford  Black.  Now,  mark,  they  had  stated 
in  your  presence  and  hearing,  as  a  fact,  that  that  girl,  sister  of 
Crawford  Black,  had  had  a  child,  and  that  the  lather  of  that  child 
was  W.  W.  McKaig;  they  had  stated  in  your  presence  and  hear- 
ing, as  a  fact,  that  he  (McKaig)  had  seduced  her,  and  that  these 
facts  were  communicated  to  the  prisoner  for  the  first  time  on  this 
Sunday  morning. 

Now,  gentlemen,  let  me  refer  you  to  the  ruling  of  the  Court.  It 
was  not  the  fact  of  seduction  to  which  we  objected,  only  so  far  as 
to  protect  us  in  our  right  to  rebut  any  such  evidence  if  offered  by 
the  defense,  but  it  was  the  particular  paper  offered  in  evidence, 
and  we  objected  to  it  upon  the  ground  that  it  did  not  tend  to 
prove  any  fact  material  to  the  issue  in  the  cause — it  did  not  tend 
to  prove  anything. 

The  Court,  in  delivering  its  opinion,  says,  and  I  quote  from  its 
decision :  "  It  is  competent  to  offer  evidence  tending  to  prove  the 
condition  of  the  mind  of  the  prisoner  at  the  time  of  the  homicide, 


FOR   KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    m'KAIG,    JR.  151 

either  by  proof  of  communications  made  to  him  on  i  he  subject  of 
his  sister's  seduction  by  the  deceased,  or  by  facts  and  circum- 
stances coming  to  bis  knowledge  touching  that  subject,  and  that 
the  paper  offered  is  admissible  upon  that  "round.'"  Here,  then,  by 
tli  is  ruling  of  the  Court  t  lie  door  is  opened  wide  to  the  defense  to 
prove  any  or  all  of  thefacts  alleged  by  them  relating  to  the  alleged 
seduction  of  the  sister  or  paternity  of  the  child.  All  these  facts  they 
say  were  rcabt  iescxist  ingin  pointof  fact,  and  asfacts  were  commu- 
nicated to  the  prisoner  on  the  Sunday  preceding  tbehomicide.  The 
riiling  of  the  Court  was  that  all  such  facts  could  be  shown  by  the 
defense  upon  the  "round  that  they  had  been  communicated  to 
the  prisoner,  and  it  was  for  the  jury  to  say  how  far,  and  to  what 
extent,  they  affected  his  mind  at  the  time  be  committed  the  fatal 
deed.  Here,  gentlemen,  was  a,  fair,  full,  and  complete  opportu- 
nity for  the  (icfcn.se  to  est  ablisb,  by  compel  cut  evidence,  the .al- 
leged seduction  or  paternity  of  the  child.  It  was  in  view  of  this 
ruling  of  the  Court  that  we  challenged  the  defense  to  come  up 
boldly  and  meet  the  issue,  seduction  or  no  seduction.  We  had 
pronounced  the  charge  false  and  a  base  fabrication.  We  had  an- 
nounced before  the  Court,  before  the  jury,  and  before  the  com- 
munity our  readiness  to  establish,  beyond  the  shade  of  a  shadow 
of  a  doubt,  that  at  the  time  of  the  deceased's  first  acquaintance 
with  Myra  Black  she  was  not  a  subject  of  a  seduction,  and  that 
at  the  time  her  child  was  begotten  (if  child  she  had,  which  lias 
not  been  proved.)  she  was  not  in  a  condition  to  know  who  was  its 
father.  Here  then  is  the  case  of  the  prisoner  and  the  state  fully 
presented  upon  this  question  of  seduction.  The  prisoner  standing 
by  the  dead  body  of  his  victim — his  lips  sealed  in  death — for  the 
first  time  brings  against  him  this  serious  charge,  a.  charge  that  he 
never  would  have  dared  to  breathe  in  his  presence  while  living, 
and  having  done  this,  he  now  conies  into  this  temple  of  justice, 
and  through  his  counsel,  before  you  and  before  the  world,  reiter- 
ates the  charge.  Here,  in  the  presence  of  the  aged  and  sorrow- 
stricken  father,  with  a,  heart  overburdened  with  grief,  and  who 
is  fast  wending  his  way  across  to  the  other  side  of  the  stream,  he 
boa.stinj.rly  tells  you  it  is  true.  "I  assumed  the  prerogative  of  the 
Almighty  ;  I  sent  the  soul  of  my  victim  unannounced  to  eternity ; 
I  draped  the  young  and  loving  wife  in  the  emblems  of  mourning, 
audi  robbed  that  child  of  its  natural  protector,  and  1  now  stand 
here  and  ask  you  as  a  jury  of  American  citizens  to  place  a  brand 
upon  that  child's  brow  that  he  shall  wear  through  all  time,  and 
be  observed  by  all  the  world  that  his  father  sleeps  in  a  seducer's 
grave."  Gentlemen,  it,  was  in  \  Lew  of  such  an  exhibit  ion  as  this, 
when  the  opportunity  had  been  fully  and  amply  given  by  the  rul- 
ing of  the  Court,  that  we  called  upon  them,  in  the  name  of  all 
that  was  sacred  to  the  cause  of  justice,  in  justice  to  the  memory 
of  the  dead,  in  justice  to  the  living  he.  had  left  behind  him,  in 
vindication  of  their  own  professional  integrity  to  sustain  the 
statements  made  by  them,  it  was  in  view  of  all  this  that  we 
begged  them  to  make  the  effort  to  sustain  the  allegations  they 
had  made  upon  this  subject.  They  had  said  that  the  deceased 
was  the  Seducer  of  the  prisoner's  sister,  and  that  she  had  a,  child, 
and  hi  was  its  father,  and  these  facts  were  communicated  to  the 


152  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

prisoner  on  the  Sunday  named.  The  Courl  lias  said  it  is  per- 
fectly competent  for  them  to  prove  each  or  all  of  these  facts;  and 
then  it  was,  gentlemen,  that  we  called  upon  them  to  come  boldly 
up  and  make  the  effort  to  prove  what  they  had  so  boastingly,  and 
the  prisoner  had  so  cowardly  charged  over  the  dead  body  of  his 
victim.  They  knew,  gentlemen,  that  they  had  the  opportunity,  and 
they  knew  that,  if  successful,  it  would  secure  an  acquital  for 
their  client.  How  broad  the  opportunity,  and  how  eager  it  should 
1  mb  seized  ;  what  easier  than  to  place  the  sister  upon  the  stand  and 
let  her  pour  into  the  ears  of  a  sympathizing  jury  a  history  of  her 
alleged  wrongs  and  ruin  ;  how  the  very  tones  of  her  voice  would 
have  been  the  death  notes  to  this  prosecution,  and  how  eagerly 
the  public  waited  for  something  substantial  to  sustain  their  sym- 
pathy for  the  defense,  which  sympathy  had  been  enlisted  through 
a  stream  of  public  sentiment,  manufactured  by  means  as  subject 
to  criticism  as  the  sentiment  itself. 

But,  lo !  and  what  is  the  disappointment  to  which  all  are 
doomed?  Has  judicial  proceedings ever  witnessed  the  like  before? 
With  all  these  damning  facts  in  their  possession,  their  time  to  act 
had  come,  the  time  to  talk  had  passed,  and  what  do  we  behold: 
they  offer  you  a  miserably  false  and  mutilated  paper,  signed  by 
no  one,  addressed  to  no  one,  purporting  to  have  been  written  six 
years  ago,  without  any  history,  nothing  to  show  where  it  was 
found,  or  by  whom,  or  for  what  purpose  it  has  been  re- 
tained these  six  years  past;  a  paper  written  originally  in  pencil, 
afterward  drawn  over  with  ink,  by  whom,  or  for  what  purpose  it 
is  not  attempted  to  explain.  Gentlemen,  for  what  purpose  is  this 
offered?  It  is  offered  as  an  existing  fact  communicated  to  the 
prisoner  to  show  the  condition  of  his  mind  on  the  Monday  morn- 
ing following.  What  effect  would  it  have  upon  your  mind,  or 
upon  the  mind  of  any  reasonable  man  authorizing  him  to  act, 
even  to  the  taking  of  human  life.  Now,  what  other  fact  is  com- 
municated to  the  prisoner  on  that  Sunday  preceding  the  morning 
of  the  homicide;  why  the  opinion  of  Mr.  Lloyd  Lowndes,  that  Mc- 
Kaig  was  the  seducer  of  his,  the  prisoner's,  sister. 

Gentlemen,  before  we  proceed  to  a  careful  analysis  of  this  testi- 
mony let  us  look  for  a  moment  at  its  surroundings,  the  sources 
from  whence  it  comes,  and  then  we  can  the  more  understandiugly 
examine  its  character  to  ascertain  the  force  it  should  iiave. 

Mr.  Lowndes  is  a  relative  of  the  family,  and  not  only  a  relative 
of  the  family,  but  upon  that  Sunday  sustained  the  relation  of 
counsel  to  the  prisoner's  father,  and  which  relation  he  now  sus- 
tains to  the  prisoner  himself.  The  prisoner  was  there  on  this 
Sunday,  as  Mr.  Syester  tells  you,  to  assist  in  preparing  for  his 
father's  defense — defense  of  what?  to  an  indictment  for  having 
cowardly  shot  young  McKaig  some  months  before,  and  which  fact 
must  have  been  as  well  known  to  the  prisoner  as  it  was  well 
known  to  every  other  citizen  in  Cumberland.  Young  McKaig  in 
place  of  taking  the  law  in  his  own  hands  had  sought  a  court  of 
justice  for  a  vindication  of  the  truth,  he  was  the  only  witness  on 
the  indictment  against  the  father.  The  prisoner  was  in  company 
with  Lowndes  on  Sunday  to  prepare  for  his  father's  defense,  and 
at  8  o'clock  the  next  morning  is  standing  over  the  dead    body  of 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL   W.    W.    M'kAIG,   JR.  153 

the  only  witness  on  the  indictment  against  the' father.  Gentle- 
men, the  sequel  shows  how  effectual  was  the  defense  prepared. 
Why  was  that  paper  offered?  Was  not  that  paperoffered  as  a,fact 
in  the  case,  and  was  i(  not  offered  to  be  proved  by  Mr.  Lowndes 
that  on  the  day  preceding  this  homicide  that  paper  was  shown  to 
the  prisoner,  and  this  evidence  is  admitted  as  a  fad  communi- 
cated to  the  prisoner  for  the  purpose  of  influencing  his  mind,  and 
Showing  yon  how  it  operated  upon  it.  Now,  if  it  was  a  fad  in  this 
case  that  William  w.  McKaigwas  the  father  of  that  child,  and 
that  fact  was  communicated  to  him  on  the  Sunday  preceding,  it 
was  no  more  or  less  a  fact  than  this  paper  offered  in  evidence. 

My  friends  on  the  other  side  said  in  their  argument  that  when 
we  got  up  here,  ami  not  only  offered  to  let  them,  bill  invited  them 
to  go  into  this  question  of  seduction  and  paternity  of  the  child, 
that  we  did  it  for  the  purpose  of  influencing  your  minds.  We  did 
not  do  it  for  any  such  purpose,  when  the  Court  decided  they 
could  introduce  any  fact  communicated  to  this  party,  and  when 
they  claimed  thai  the  fact  of  seduction  and  paternity  of  the  child 
was  communicated  to  him  on  Sunday  for  the  first  time,  we 
asked  them  not  to  blast  this  man's  name  with  any  such  miserable 
and  contemptible  document  as  that  offered,  that  if  they  had  the 
evidence  of  the  seduction  of  the  sister  and  the  paternity  of  this 
child,  to  come  and  prove  it  on  the  deceased  and  give  us  an  oppor- 
tunity to  show  how  utterly  false  the  whole  charge  was.  That  is 
what  we  desired,  and  had  a  right  to  desire.  And  T  say  it  is  cruel 
and  worse  than  cruel,  to  stand  now  by  the  side  of  this  dead  man's 
grave-and  undertake  to  insinuate  that  he  has  violated  the  peace  and 
chastity  of  that  home,  when  they  had  it,  as  they  say,  in  their  power 
to  prove  it,  and  the  Court  had  given  them  the  right  to  prove  it,  and 
did  not  dare  to  make  the  effort.  Then,  gentlemen,  where  is  the  se- 
duction? gut  they  say  this  is  not  a  case  of  seduction.  They  tell  you 
in  one  breath  that  seduction  is  not  in  this  case,  and  then  they  ask 
you  to  acquit  this  man  upon  the  ground  that  William  W.  Me- 
Kaig  was  the  seducer  of  his  sister,  "it  is  either  in  or  out.  If  it  is 
not  in  this  ease,  it  is  their  fault  and  not  the  fault  of  the  State. 
We  asked  them  and  invited  them,  and  the  Court  gave  them  the 
liberty  of  entering  into  the  fullest  investigation  oi'  that  fact. 

Now,  gentlemen,  what  did  they  do?  Oh,  in  the  name  of  jus- 
tice, in  the  name  of  the  laws  of  the  land  under  which  we  live,  in 
in  the  name  of  every  household  in  this  community,  gentlemen,  1 
inquire  what  did  they  do?  Have  you  looked  at  that  paper,  gen- 
tlemen? Where  did  it  come  from?  What  is  its  history?  Written 
in  1866.  By  whom?  Addressed  to  whom?  Hearing  internal  evi- 
dence of  what  ?  The  evidences  that  would  show  a,  deeper  state  of 
degradation  on  the  part  of  anybody  receiving  and  acting  upon  it, 

t  lian  we  would  imagine  ever  attached  to  the  sister  of  t  he  accused, 

offered  either  as  evidence  to  prove  seduction,  or  offered  as  evi- 
dence, as  a  fact  that  was  communicated  tot  his  party,  upon  which 
he  would  believe  that  his  sister  had  been  seduced  I  iy  the  writer  .of 
such  a  paper  as  tins.     Does  it  bear  evidence  that  the  party  that 

would  receive  such  a  communication  as  that  and  act  upon  \l  was 
the  subjeel  of  »  duction? 

Gentlemen,  if  the  counsel  on  the  other  side  will  allow  you,  and 


154  TRIAL   OF    HARRY    (JTi  \WFOBP   BLACK 

you  think  it  is  of  any  weight,  or  importance  in  tl  case,  Ebfigthat 
you  will  take  this  letter  to  your  jury  room,  and  1  beg  you  will 
apply  to  i1  a  strong  magnifying  glass.  I  have  one  here,  and  l  b«g 
that  you  will  trace  the  letters  and  see  where  in  almost  every  in- 
stance those  have  been  traced  over  the  lead-pencil  marks  with  ink. 
That  has  been  done  by  somebody  ?    But  nobody  knows  who. 

And  then,  gentlemen,  evidently,  after  having  traced  over  with 
the  ink  the  rubber  is  applied,  ami  the  pencil  marks  in  many  eases 
rubbed  oul .  or  in  many  cases  left,  and  with  a  magnifying  glass  by 
bringing  the  principal  Focus  to  the  lines,  you  can  thus  trace  dis- 
tinctly where  the  lead-pencil  marks  are,  and  where  i  hey  have  been 
traced  over  by  the  ink,  and  where  they  have  failed  fully  to  erase. 
This  is  the  fact  that  they  offered  to  show,  bearing  on  this  question 
of  seduction,  when  they  had  the  fact  in  their  possession,  as  they 
tell  you,  that  William  W.McKaig  was  the  lather  of  the  child  and 
the  seducer  of  this  girl. 

Now,  gentlemen, again,  who  was  brought  upon  this  stand  when 
the  letter  was  offered?  Why,  John  M.  Resley.  What  did  they 
ask  him?  He  was  asked,  "  Whose  handwriting  is  that?"  He 
answered,  "That  is  William  W.  MeKaig's."  "How  do  you 
know':'"  He  was  not  asked  the  question,  "Are  you  acquainted 
with  the  hand-writing  of  William  W.  filcKaig?"  Then  .he  was 
dropped  and  allowed  to  go  oil'  the  stand,  and  lie  was  not,  brought 
back  to  us  lor  cross-examination,  lie  simply  stated  the  fact  with- 
out laying  the  proper  foundation  that  this  was  in  the  handwriting 
of  William  W.  McKaig.  When  was  it  written?  [n  1866.  Why. 
William  W.  McKaig  had  been  away  from  Cumberland  for  six  or 
seven  years.  Who  knew  his  handwriting?  And  how  can  you  test 
handwriting,  gentlemen  ?  Why  there  is  a  certain  element  of  indi- 
viduality about  handwriting  that  gives  you  the  test  of  recognition; 
it  is  like  recognizing  a  man  by  the  countenance — individuality  that 
stands.  When  you  see  the  handwriting  of  a  man  that  you  have 
heen  familial-  with,  and  have  often  seen  him  write,  then  comes  up 
that  individuality  that  attaches  itself  to  the  handwriting  itself 
by  which  you  are  enabled  to  judge.  But  let  that  handwriting  be 
tracked  over  with  ink,  that  individuality  is  destroyed,  and,  there- 
fore, I  ask  what  evidence  there  is  in  the  case  to  show  who  wrote 
that  paper,  or  where;  it  came  from':'  But,  gentlemen,  this  is  not 
all;  where  was  that  letter  found?  Who  found  it?  To  whom  was  it 
addressed?  Gentlemen, let  me  submit  that  letter  to  a  jury  of  t  welve 
women.  Do  you  think  they  would  have  any  sympathy  for  a  party 
who  would  receive  such  a  communication  as  that,  and  act  upon 
it?  Do  you  think  that  a  person  educated  up — no,  I  would  rather 
say,  educated  down — to  that  standard  of  morality,  is  a  subject  for 
sympathy  among  refined,  virtuous,  chaste  ladies;  is  there  any  evi- 
dence of  seduction  there?  And  that,  too,  in  response  to  a  note 
written  by  one  to  the  party  who  was  the  writer  of  this  letter.  Why, 
gentlemen,  go  to  the  largest  metropolis  in  the  country;  go  into 
your  most  common  brothels  and  it  is  a  production  only  worthy  to 
be  issued  from  such  a  place  as  that,  i  do  not  know  how  you  would 
feel,  but  Lknow  if  I  had  laid  before  me  a,  communication  like  that 
and  it  was  said  that  that  had  been  addressed  to  my  sister  in  re- 
sponse to  a  note  seut  by  her,  I  would  go  to  her  and  inquire  often 


FOR  KILLING  COLONEL  W.  W.  M'KAIG,  JR.      LOO 

before  T  would  lay  the  charge  of  seduction  to  any  roan.  And  they 
say  toe  have  been  suppressing  testimony,  because  we  did  not  bring 
a  pair  of  pantaloons  here.  Our  friend,  who  addressed  yen  yester- 
day, and  all  of  them  have  rung  the  changes  upon  it.  and  staled  we 
suppressed  the  pantaloons,  and  for  a  purpose.  Whoever  supposed 
the  pantaloons  would  he  wanted  in  a  caseof  this  kind.  Suppressed 
testimony  have  we?  Give  us  the  history  of  that  paper  before  you 
talk  of  suppressing  testimony;  you  promised  to  do  it  in  your  open- 
ing; you  promised  to  tell  us  where  you  found  it;  to  whom  address- 
ed, and  by  whom  it  was  written.  You  have  uot  done,  a  solitary 
thing  of  the  kind,  and  yet,  gentlemen  stand  here  and  brand McKaig 
as  the  seducer  of  this  man's  sister. 

But  the  gentlemen  say  that  although  the  question  of  seduction 
is  not  in  this  case — and  not  in,  gentlemen,  because  they  have 
Shirked  the  responsibility  of  the  issue,  for  they  had  full  opportu- 
nity to  have  placed  it  in  evidence  before  you — that  although  that 
is  not  in.  yet  he  still  acted  under  the  belief  that  such  is  the  case, 
and,  therefore,  you  are  to  consider  it  when  you  come  to  consider 
the  gradeof  this  homicide.  Acting  under  the  belief;  do  they  wish 
to  make  the  belief  a  test?  They  say  that  that  belief  was  a,  reason- 
able belief,  growing  out  of  the  communications  made  to  him  ou 
the  Sunday  preceding  the  homicide. 

Weli,  now,  gentlemen,  let  me  call  your  attention  for  a  moment 
to  the  scene.  What  were  the  communications  made  to  him?  Why, 
Mr.  Lowndes  telisyou  that  he  had  sent  for  him  to  prepare  for  his 
father's  defense.  Defense  of  what?  Defense  of  his  father,  who 
had  been  indicted  for  an  assault  with  intent  to  kill,  for  shooting 
this  young  man  down  in  the  streets  of  Cumberland  some  months 
before  .Now,  what  did  he  tell  him?  lie  told  him  that,  in  his  opin- 
ion, McKaig  was  the  seducer  of  his  sister,  and  therefore,  it  would 
be  necessary  for  that  sister  to  be  brought  as  a  witness  to  testify 
upon  the  stand.  Now,  is  Mr.  Lowndes' opinion  to  be  a  test  in 
eases  of  this  kind?  Is  he  to  be  judge  and  jury,  and  to  pass  judg- 
ment on  the  man,  and  then  the  party  who  listens,  to  go  out  and 
execute  that  judgment?  Is  that  the  law?  Is  that  the  test  you  wish 
to  establish  in  cases  of  ibis  kind?  And  he,  Lowndes,  tells  him 
there  is  a.  letter.  lie  did  not  tell  him  by  whom  it  was  written,  but 
be  tele-  him  that  tbe  letter  is  at  Mr.  Roman's  house.  Then  the  only 
Other  testimony  is  that  he,  goes  to  Mr.  Roman's  house  and  he  says 
to  this  party,  "  read  this  letter."  And  what  Mr.  Lowndes  tells  you 
is  a  remarkable  fact,  that  he  did  give  him  the  mimes  of  Judge 
Pearreand  William  vv.  McKaig  in  connection  with  that  letter,  and 
yet  no  effort  was  made  by  either  of  the  parties  to  tins  conference, 
to  obtain  from  either  of  those  persons  any  information  about  this 
letter. 

Now,  gentlemen,  standing  at  this  point  of  the  case,  let  us  test 
the  theory  of  the  defense  that  is  now  presented  ley  them.  Having 
abandoned  the  theory  of  seduction,  theynowcome  before  you  and 
say,  that  Black  acted  under  the  belief  when  he  committed  this 
homicide,  1  li.>t  McKaig  was  such  seducer.  Assuming  litis  to  be  so, 
we  have  called  in  vain  tor  the.  counsel  on  the  other  side  to  show 
us  the  law  that  such  a.  belief  would  mitigate,  much  less  excuse  a, 
homicide.    But  L  am  not  now  examining  this  branch  of  the  case 


156  TRIAL    OF   HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

in  reference  to  any  question  of  law,  but  in  reference  to  the  two 
questions  of  fact.  Did  lie  entertain  any  such  belief,  and  had  he,  as 
a  reasonable  man,  any  sufficient  ground  for  entertaining  any  such 
belief. 

what  did  this  man  Black  know  at  that  time;  what  did  he  know? 
He  knew  that  his  sister,  in  the  month  of  April,  six  months  ante- 
rior, had  been  sent  from  borne  in  disgrace.  lie  knew,  from  the 
testimony  of  the  mother,  that  she  was  of  an  unchaste  character, 
although  he  did  not  know  who  was  the  seducer,  or  who  was  alleged 
to  have  been.  He  knew,  because  he  had  been  told  on  the  Saturday 
preceding,  that  an  occurrence  had  taken  place  some  time  before  at 
the  fair  grounds  between  the  father  and  William  W.  McKaig;  and 
lie  knew  that  at  that  time,  and  in  that  public  place,  in  the  presence 
of  that  father  and  the  people  assembled,  William  W.  McKaig  had 
announced  that  she  was  a  woman  of  an  unchaste  character  and 
had  denied  every  thingconnecting  him  in  reference  to  this  matter. 
HeTcnew  all  these  facts;  he  had  been  referred  to  Judge  Paerreand 
to  William  W.  McKaig,  in  refeienceto  this  letter.  And  what  else 
did  he  know?  Why  lie  knew  William  W.  McKaig;  and  he  knew 
him  as  a  gentleman  of  high  standing  in  Cumberland;  he  knew  him 
as  a  man  of  extensive  business;  lie  knew  him  as  a  generous  and  a 
brave  man;  he  knew  him  as  a  friend  and  acquaintance  to  a  certain 
extent;  he  knewr  that  he  was  at  the  head  of  a  family;  a  husband, 
and  the  fa:  her  of  a  child.  He  knew  all  these  things;  and  he  knew 
that  William  W.  McKaig  was  there  in  the  city  of  Cumberland; 
he  knew  that  if  he  went  to  William  W.  McKaig,  as  a  gentleman, 
and  a  man  of  honor,  and  had  said  to  him,  "Sir,  you  are  charged 
with  this  thing,  here  is  a  communication,  is  this  true,  or  is  it  not? 
Tell  me;  i  want  to  act  upon  the  facts."  He  knew  that  he  could 
have  gotten  the  facts  from  that  source  without  any  difficulty  at 
all.  lie  knew  another  thing;  he  knew  that,  notwithstanding  his 
father  had  shot  A  illiam  W.  McKaig  down  in  the  streets  of  Cum- 
berland in  a  cowardly  manner,  from  behind,  that  McKaig  had 
declined  taking  the  law  into  his  own  hands.  Why,  gentlemen,  he 
knew  that  this  very  man,  William  W.  McKaig 

Mr.  Nelson.  Mr.  Whitney,  what  evidence  is  there  that  Mr. 
McKaig  had  been  shot  down  by  Mr.  Black? 

Mr.  Whitney.  Gentlemen,  he  knew  that  he  was  called  there  to 
assist  in  the  preparation  of  the  defense  of  his  father,  for  an  indict- 
ment had  been  found  by  the  grand  jury. 

Mr.  Nelson.  That  indictment  is  not  before  this  jury. 

Mr.  Whitney.  He  knew  then  that  William  W.  KcKaig — what- 
ever may  have  been  the  difficulty — lie  knew  that  William  W.  Mc- 
Kaig, instead  of  taking  the  law  into  his  own  hands,  and  applying 
the  law  of  vengeance  that  has  been  supplicated  here  in  behalf  of 
tins  prisoner— he  knew  that  William  W.  McKaig  was  then  apply- 
ing to  the  tribunal  of  justice  for  five  investigation  of  anything 
that  might  be  connected  between  hnu  and  the  father  of  the  pris- 
oner. He  knew  all  these  facts,  yet,  on  the  following  morning  at 
the  early  hour  described  by  the  witnesses  he  is  found  watching, 
lying  in  waif,  armed  with  a  dangerous,  deadly  weapon  of  the 
character  shown  to  you  on  the  stand,  waiting  ami  waiting  for  his 
victim;  ami  then,  when  he  comes  within  sight,  marches  forward 


FOR   KILLING    COLONEL   W.   W.    M  KAIG,   JR.  157 

to  meet  him,  and  then  this  occurrence  takes  place.  Is  that  the 
law  to  be  established  in  Maryland?  Why,  my  friends  on  the  other 
side  say  that  there  never  was  a  case  of  this  kind  where  a  party 
had  been  convicted;  there  neve!-  was  a  case  of  this  kind  tried 
before;  there  never  was  a  case  of  the  kind  tried  before  where  such 
an  abortive  attempt  was  ever  made  to  crowd  in  the  question  of 
seduction  to  prejudice  the  mind  of  the  jury  as  in  this  case. 

T  et  me  turn  your  attention  for  a  moment,  at  this  point,  to  the 
case  of  Sickles.  My  friend  has  read  law  here;  lie  cited  the  case  of 
Simeon  and  Levi.  That  is  not  the  first  time  it  has  been  cited;  it 
has  been  cited  in  everyone  of  the  seduction  cases  that  have  ever 
been  tried  in  the  country;  it  was  cited  in  the  Sickles  case,  but  the 
gentleman  did  not  read  far  enough.  If  it  had  occurred  to  the 
learned  gentleman  to  read  further,  he  would  have  found  that  the 
aged  parent,  when  he  was  about  to  depart,  inspired  by  the  proph- 
ecy that  was  upon  him,  and  his  lip*  touched,  as  it  were,  with  a 
coal  from  heaven's  altar,  he  said  "cursed  be  their  anger,  for  it  was 
fierce,  and  their  wrath,  for  it  was  cruel."  That  is  Jacob's  lan- 
guage when  he  was  ascending  up  to  heaven,  and  about  to  be 
gathered  to  his  fathers. 

Now,  what  are  the  facts  in  the  Sickles  case? 

Mr.  Nelson.  Is  that  the  Bible  that  you  are  reading  from? 

Mr.  Whitney.  I  am  quoting  the  language  of  the  Bible;  lam 
reading  from  this  trial  in  order  to  save  time. 

Mr.  Nelson.  If  you  are  reading  from  the  Bible,  or  quoting  from 
the  Bible,  I  wish  you  would  read  from  it.  We  have  got  nothing 
to  do  here  with  the  Sickles  trial. 

Mr.  Whitney.  The  Sickles  trial  has  been  referred  to  repeatedly 
here,  as  it  has  elsewhere,  as  a  test  case,  because  Mr.  Sickles  was 
acquitted.  Nov,  gentlemen,  you  have  nothing  to  do  with  verdict  - 
of  other  juries;  I  do  not  complain  of  this  verdict;  the  law  laid 
down  in  this  case  is  perfectly  satisfactory  to  the  State  of  Mary- 
land. But  what  was  this  case?  It  has  been  cited  as  a  parallel 
case  to  this.    Let  me  read  you  a  brief  statement  of  the  facts. 

Mr.  Whitney  proceeded  to  read.  After  he  had  read  a  few  minutes, 
Mr.  Nelson,  interrupting,  &aicl  : 

May  it,  please  your  honor.  I  must  object  to  this.  1  do  so  with  great, 
reluctance.  It  may  be  all  right ;  butwhatin  the  world  has  the  mere. 
annotation  of  somebody  whom  we  do  not  know,  put  to  a  mere 
pamphlet  of  this  kind,  got  to  do  with  the  facts  of  ibis  case  before  this 
jury?  Is  ii  any  portion  of  the  case  that  the  gentleman  is  reading 
from.-'  It  is  nothing  in  the  World  but  the  mere  statement  of  some  irre- 
sponsible reporter.  We  do  not  know  whether  he  is  stating  properly 
the  facts  in  the  case  or  not. 

Mr.  Whitney.  It  is  the  same  work  from  which  Mr.  Voorhees  rend. 

'I'hc  members  of  the  <  lourt  taking  the  matter  into  consideral  ion,  and 
apparently  being  a  little  embarrassed  by  the  objection,  Mr.  Whitney 
said  :  [f  there  is  any  difficulty  in  the  mind  of  the  ( 'ourt,  1  am  willing 
to  waive  the  further  reading.  1  certainly,  however,  have  a  right,  when 
counsel  refer  to  the  case,  to  stab' the  tacts  of  that  case,  and  to  show 
that  the  case  is  not  a  parallel  one. 

The  Court.  Proceed,  air. 

Mr.  Whitney.  The  facts  of  that  case  are  perfectly  notorious,  and 


153  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

every  ease  depends  on  its  own  facts.  We  have  called  upon  the  coun- 
sel <>ii  the  other  side  for  facts.  My  friend  in  his  opening  address  ii>  yon 
challenges  the  production  of  a  case  of  this  kind  where  the  party  has 
ever  been  acquitted.  Whal  does  it  reduce  us  to?  Pause  for  a  moment  and 
reflect — consider  what  is  til:'  law  to  be  established  by  any  such  doctrine 
as  this.  Let  us  consider  and  see  what  is  to  be  its  application.  The 
question  of  seduction  is  out  ofthecase.  That  they  say,  although  they 
could  have  proved  it  had  itexisted.  Don't  they  know  very  well  that 
if  they  could  have  proved  the  fact  of  seduction,  plainly  and  clearly 
before  you,  that  this  family  wrong  and  all  these  at  rocities,  said  to  have 
been  committed,  which  have  been  Btated  here,  that  they  could  have 
acquitted  this  many  But  what  have  they  done  instead?  Theysay 
that  they  acted  on  belief.  What  docs  that  doctrine  amount  to  ?  Let 
us  tor  it.  Gentlemen  of  the  jury.  I  stand  in  somebody's  way  in  the 
city  of  Baltimore.  Sonic  person's  sister  has  fallen,  and  has.  perhaps, 
given  birth  to  a  child.  That  man  goes  and  says  to  the  brother,  k"  Mr. 
Whitney  has  sedueed  your  sister;  now,  you  shoot  him,  and  I  will  give 
you  $5,003."  lie  shoots  me,  ami  is  brought  into  a  court  of  justice; 
and  what  does  he  say?  ''Why  somebody  told  me  that  Mr.  Whitney 
seduced  my  sister,  and  T  shoot  him,  ami  a  Frederick  county  jury  have 
established  the  law,  and  that  justifies  me."  That  is  it,  gentlemen ; 
you  cannot  make  it  anything  else.  You  may  talk,  and  discuss,  and 
cite  as  much  scripture  as  you  please,  and  it  cannot  come  to  anything 
else.  Now,  whatever  may  be  your  views  as  men,  where  the  tact  of 
seduction  is  established  under  the  peculiar  and  harrowing  circum- 
stances surrounding  the  family,  where  confidence  is  betrayed,  and 
where  all  those  feelings  of  our  nature  are  outraged,  what  a  man  will 
do  is  for  his  own  conscience  to  decide.  It  is  a  question  for  him  to  deter- 
mine. It'  he  takes  vengeance  into  his  own  hands,  he  violates  the  laws 
of  the  land  ;  but  under  certain  circumstances  he  may  he  sustained  in 
doingit.  When  such  a  question  comes  before  you,  as  a  jury,  it  will 
lie  rime  enough  lor  you  to  settle  the  question  as  to  what  you  will  do  in 
such  acase  as  that.  But  gentlemen,  in  the  name  of  common  justice, 
in  the  name  of  humanity,  in  the  name  of  law  and  order,  in  the  name 
of  all  that  is  dear  and  sacred  to  an  American  citizen,  establish  no  such 
doctrine  as  is  here  contended  tor;  make  no  man's  opinion  a  Final 
judgment,  from  which  there  is  no  appeal,  ami  on  which  the  party  may, 
without  notice,  proceed  to  execute,  even  to  the  taking  of  human  life. 
Gentlemen,  ponder  well  the  results  of  such  a  doctrine.  Juries  are 
said  In'  the  teachers  of  public  morals;  look  well  to  it,  the  lesson  you 
shall  teach  by  the  verdict  yon  may  render  in  this  ease. 

Although  our  friends  have  repeatedly  told  you  that  seduction  is  not 
in  this  case,  and  you  are  not  to  consider  it,  yet  they  have  spent  hours 
in  reading  from  the  Bible,  and  painting  before  you,  in  the  most  vivid 
colors,  the  character  of  the  offense,  and  the  merited  doom  of  its  per- 
petrator. Grant  it  all.  If  the  offense  is  of  such  a  character,  and  the 
perpetrator  is  to  be  punished  with  death,  is  the  party  charged  not  to  be 
entitled  to  a  trial,  in  order  to  ascertain  the  fact  of  his  guilt  or  inno- 
cence? Are  we  living  in  a  country,  and  under  a  government,  where 
we  have  a  crime  punishable  with  death,  and  that  without  a  trial,  to 
determine  the  guilt  ?  Is  the  opinion  of  any  man,  however  interested 
as  a  relative  or  legal  adviser,  to  be  a  sufficient  warrant,  upon  the 
strength  of  which  the  man  is  to  go  forth  to  slaughter  and  vengeance? 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    ITKAIQ,    JR.  159 

Is  this  the  high  moral  sentiment  thai   has  overridden  and  obliterated 

the  musty  law  of  our  fathers,  covered  over  with  the  dusi  of  ages,  about 
which  we  have  heard  so  much  from  the  eloquent  gentlemen  <>n  the 
other  side?  Is  this  the  law  that  a  Frederick  county  jury  is  t<>  establish 
for  their  own  households  and  their  own  hearthstones?  Rest  assured, 
gentlemen,  that  however  congenial  it  may  lie  to  (he  atmosphere  of 
Indiana,  the  home  <>r  the  distinguished  advocate  who  has  advanced 
it,  such  a  doctrine  ami  such  a  law  will  find  no  response  in  the  hearts 
either  of  the  sons  or  daughters  of  Maryland. 

You  have  been  told,  in  most  eloquent  terms,  that  it  was  better  that, 
ten  guilty  men  should  escape,  than  that  one  innocent  man  should 
suffer.  Grant  it  !  T>id  Black  act  upon  this  rule  when  he  shot  Mc- 
Kaig?  Does  the  higher  moral  sentiment  that  the  gentleman  from  In- 
diana seeks  to  establish  as  law,  recognize  any  such  rule?  lie  tells 
you  that  you  are  to  give  a  party  the  benefit  of  any  doubt,  and  he  has 
read  hooks  to  sustain  the  position.  Grant  it  !  Did  Black  act  upon 
this  rule  when  lie  shot  McKaig?  Does  the  higher  moral  sentiment 
the  gentleman  desires  to  inculcate  into  the  jurisprudence  of  Maryland 
recognize  this  rule?  He  says  you  are  to  give  no  judgment  against 
this  prisoner,  unless  you  have  ail  the  probabilities  before  yon.  Had 
Mr.  Lowndes  all  the  probabilities  before  him,  when  he  pronounced 
judgment  against  McKaig  on  the  Sunday,  and  had  Black  all  the  prob- 
abilities before  him  on  the  following  Monday  morning,  when  he  issued 
forth,  armed  to  the  teeth,  to  execute  the  judgment  of  Lowndes?  Did 
Black  give  McKaig  the  benefit  of  a  doubt?  The  counsel  has  read  to 
you  where  the  old  justices  were  hung,  because  they  gave  false  judg- 
ments, and  did  not  give  the  party  accused  the  benefit  of  a  doubt.  Did 
Lowndes  give  McKaig  the  benefit  of  a  doubt,  when  he  entered  up 
judgment  against  him  on  the  Sunday;  and,  perchance,  if  from  not 
giving  him  the  benefit  of  the  doubt,  he  entered  up  a  false  judgment? 
Whom  will  the  learned  counsel  on  the  other  side  designate  as  the 
proper  tribunal  to  administer  to  him  the  same  justice  that  was  admin- 
istered to  the  justices  of  old  as  a  penalty  for  entering  up  their  false 
judgments? 

Once  more,  before  I  leave  this  branch  of  the  subject,  I  ask  you  to 
ponder  well  before  you  establish  any  such  doctrine  as  has  been  urged 
before  you  in  this  case.  The  eyes  of  the  people  are  upon  you;  you 
stand  forth  to-day  as  the  conservators  of  the  public  peace.  Stand 
linn  to  the  law  as  it  is  written,  and  not  be  carried  away  by  alleged 
laws  not  written,  and  existing  only  in  the  imagination  of  ingenious 
counsel,  who  find  it  necessary  to  appeal  to  them  to  carry  through  a 
desperate  cause.  Remember,  gentlemen,  that  the  jury  box  is  the 
great  balance-wheel  in  the  complicated  machinery  of  human  govern- 
ment. Let  il  sustain,  the  integrity  Of  the  Constitution,  and  vindicate 
the  laws  of  the  land. 

Now,  gentlemen,  I  am  exhausting  your  patience  and  occupying  too 
much  oi  your  time,  for  it  really  seems  to  me  that  this  whole  ease  i-. 
within  a  very  small  compass,  and  I  will  hasten  to  the  second  inquiry 
that,  is  presented  to  our  minds  in  the  investigation  of  this  cause,  ami 
that  is  the  subject  of  self-defense.  When,  did  that  originate?  Where 
did  u  originate?  l>id  if  originate  when  Crawford  Black,  on  the 
morning  oi  that  fatal  day.  was  Lurking  about  in  the  pathway  of 
this  very  deceased  for  the  purpose   of  taking  hi--   life,  armed  with  a 


1G0  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

deadly  weapon  :  armed  with  a  weapon  of  this  kind,  [showing  the  pisl  >1 
to  the  jury,  which  is  a  large  navy  revolver,]  to  protect  himself  against 
wiwiar*,  going  about  in  his  Dative  city  to  deal  wi>h  his  customers  in  his 
ordinary  business?  Did  ii  originate,  gentlemen,  when  he  stood  by  the 
side  of  that  dead  body,  and  for  the  first  time  announced  "That  is 
whal  you  have  got  for  ruining  my  sister,  and  trying  to  pul  my  father 
in  the  penitentiary;  and  I  have  another  shot  left  for  any  damned 
scoundrel  who  says  that  I  have  done  wrong."  Is  there  self-defense 
there?  Is  there  self-defense  in  the  affidavit  that  is  found  in  the  very 
record  in  this  case?  An  affidavit  made  by  him  In  Cumberland,  that 
he  could  not  safely  proceed  to  the  trial  of  this  ease  at  that  time,  on  ac- 
count of  the  absence  of  his  sister,  who  was  a  material  witness  to  prove 
the  paternity  of  thai  child,  a  witness  that  he  has  not  dared  to  put  on 
the  stand,  now  that  his  trial  has  come  up.  Gentlemen,  do  the  facts, 
the  living  facts  that  originated  a!  that  time,  mark  out  self-defense? 

Now,  gentlemen,  I  desire  to  call  your  attention  for  one  moment  to 
the  coat.  This,  gentlemen,  is  the  bouquet  of  the  widow  and  the  or- 
phan. You  see  there  how  that  wound  was  inflicted.  Was  it  not 
necessarily  inflicted  when  the  arm  was  raised  above  the  head?  You 
see  that  wound  ;  you  see  that  wound  in  the  side  ;  you  see  by  the  shirt 
that  there  is  a  wound  entering  the  side.  Xow,  these  are  living  facts, 
that  don't  depend  on  living  testimony.  These  are  the  records  that 
<  'iaw Cord  Black  has  left,  by  which  he  is  to  he  judged.  .Vow,  what  does 
the  doctor  say?  The  doctor  tells  you  that  the  ball  entering  die  side, 
entered  a<  a  point  posterior  to  the  medial  line.  How  was  that  received  ? 
lie  tells  you  that  it«  course  was  downwards  and  forwards  through  the 
body.  Where  stood  the  party  who  fired  the  shot?  These  are  facts 
not  depending  on  the  recollection  of  witnesses  Where  is  the  first 
shot  fired  on  that  occasion.  What  was  the  situation  of  the  party  when 
he  fired  that  first  shot?  Why,  hi'  waited,  in  the  language  of  the  wit- 
ness, until  McKaig  had  passed  him,  until  he  was  entirely  oil"  his  guard, 
when  he  turns  round  and  points  the  pistol  and  shoots  him  there. 
Now,  what  occurs  alter  that  ?  What  is  the  evidence?  Why,  the  testi- 
mony all  shows  that  simultaneously  with  the  first  shot,  and  before  the 
smoke  from  the  fatal  pistol  had  risen  above  the  head  of  either  of  the 
parties,  the  deceased  threwup  his  hands  in  a  supplicating  position, 
(nothing  in  them  then,  gentlemen,)  and  staggered  from  the  pavement 
into  the  street.  The  deceased  then  attempts  to  cross  the  street,  and 
Black  follows  up  from  behind  and  discharges  another  barrel  of  Ins  pis- 
tol;  the  deceased  succeeds  in  reaching  the  curbstone  at  the  opposite 
side  of  the  street,  and  when,  by  the  post  is  about  to  fall,  he  receives 
another  shot,  from  behind,  the  effect  of  which  seems  to  be  to  rally  him 
foi  a  moment,  and  he  makes  another  effort  to  recross  the  street,  and 
when  about  midway,  in  the  very  act  of  falling,  with  his  face  to  the 
ground,  he  receives  another  shot  from  the  pistol  of  Black,  who  was 
then  standing  over  him,  which  shot  entered  the  spinal  column,  and  he 

fell  a  corpse. 

Gentlemen,  you  have  this  testimony  from  the  witnesses  on  both 
sides,  corroborated  by  the  locality  of  the  wounds,  as  testified  to  bythe 
medical  witnesses,  and  by  the  blood-stained  garments  of  McKaig  that 
have  been  exhibited  here  before  yon.  Gentlemen,  what  can  the  ad- 
miring friends  of  Crawford  Black  find  here  to  awaken  their  enthusi- 
asm?    What  can  a  brave  man  discover  here  to  hold  up  to  the  admiring 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    m'kAIG,    JR.  161 

gaze  of  chivalry?  What  can  an  American  jury  find  here  to  sustain 
the  theory  of  self-defense?  They  were  coward's  shots,  and  most  cow- 
ardly were  they  inflicted  ! 

The  gentlemen  on  the  other  side  say,  when  they  came  to  the  ques- 
tion of  self-defence  4hat  if  you  have  a  doubt  about  it,  you  aretoacquit. 
I  disagree  with  thisi  in  their  law.  I  say  it  is  not  the  law,  but,  on  the 
other  hand,  if  the  State  has  made  out  its  ease  against  this  prisoner, 
clearly  and  fully,  and  he  puts  in  a  plea  of  justification,  he  is  bound  to 
make  good  that  plea,  and  if  he  fails,  the  case  of  the  State  stands 
good  and  unrebutted,  and  conviction  must  follow. 

How  singular  the  exhibition  of  Crawford  Black,  standing  here,  and 
through  each  of  the  four  counsel  who  have  addressed  you,  ask  to  be 
acquitted  upon  this  question  of  doubt,  repeating  and  reiterating  it  in 
your  hearing,  reading  from  the  books  to  show  it  to  be  your  duty  so  to 
do,  when  he,  without  a  moment's  warning,  ushered  the  soul  of  his 
victim  into  eternity,  because,  as  they  say  in  one  branch  of  their  de- 
fense, be  believed  him  to  have  been  the  seducer  of  bis  sister,  which 
fact,  if  he  ever  believed  at  all,  (and  assuming  him  to  have  been  a  brave 
man,  the  evidence  all  shows  he  never  did  believe,)  he  could,  in  thirty 
minutes'  time,  have  fully  satisfied  himself  that  such  belief  was  ground- 
less, and  the  opinion  of  Mr.  Lowndes  was  a  false  and  erroneous  one. 

Now,  gentlemen,  let  us  for  a  few  moments  come  to  discuss  this 
question  of  self-defense.  You  have  these  living  facts  before  you, 
already  referred  to.  Now  let  us  come  to  the  witnesses  by  which  they 
seek  to  establish  this  self-defense.  Let  us  analyze  this  testimony ;  we 
have  the  surrounding  circumstances  ;  these  transactions  ;  we  have  his 
declaration  ;  we  have  the  affidavit  that  he  made,  found  in  the  record  ; 
we  have  the  locality  of  the  wounds,  and  we  have  the  situation  of  the 
party  as  be  crossed  the  street.  Let  us  now  analyze  this  testimony  and 
see  where  this  theory  of  self-defense  is  to  be  found.  The  first  witness 
they  called  is  Charles  M.  Medore.  Now,  he  tells  you  that  he  was  in  the 
store  nearly  opposite  to  where  this  occurred,  and  that  what  he  saw  was 
through  the  window,  and  the  window  was  down;  that  hearing  the 
first  shot  he  turned  around  and  looked  out  of  the  window.  Now 
what  does  he  tell  you  ?  He  tells  you  that  he  saw  the  pistol,  and  that 
when  he  saw  it  it  was  ten  feet  in  the  street.  Now,  1  want  to  test  these 
witnesses,  one  by  the  other,  and  see  how  they  stand  the  searching  test 
of  truth,  which  you  are  bound  to  give.  He  says  he  saw  this  pistol, 
and  described  it,  attempting  to  give  us  the  size  and  character  of  it 
as  he  saw  it  through  that  window,  about  ten  feet  in  the  street. 
He  tells  you  that  he  went  into  that  office,  unbuckled  that.  belt,. 
And  tells  you  another  fact.  That  when  that  last  shot  was  fired  by 
Black  at  McKaig,  Black  was  standing  in  front  of  McKaig,  a  fact  that 
is  contradicted  by  every  witness  in  the  cause,  except  one  other,  offered 
by  the  defense,  and  alike  contradicted  by  the  locality  of  the  wounds. 
Now  you  are  testing  human  testimony.  Let  us  bring  it  to  the  crucible 
that  will  bring  out  the  truth.  But  what  does  be  tell  you  also?  He- 
tells  you  that  the  pistol  that  he  did  see  "was  the  pistol  that  Mr.  Turney 
picked  up.  Now,  it  is  proved  beyond  all  question  that  the  pistol  that 
Turney  picked  up  was  the  pistol  that  fell  from  the  body  of  McKaig 
when  his  body  was  raised,  and  it  could  not,  therefore,  have  been  in 
his  band.  Again,  this  witness  swears  that  he  unbuckled  McKaig*s 
belt.     But  they  say  on  the  other  side,  (to  be  sure,  be  swore  that  heun- 


»  162  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

buckled  his  belt.)  bul  la  nol  his  testimony  as  good  as  Dr.  Smith's,  who 
swore  he  did  not  doit?  Now,  it  is  a  desperate  cause  thai  requires 
counsel  to  raise  a  question  of  veracity  between  the  boy  Charles  M. 
MedoreandDr.  Smith.  Dr.  Smith  is,  f  trust,  known  tosomeofthe 
gentlemen  of  this  jury.  He  Us  a  native  of  your  county,  a  man  who 
has  grown  gray  in  the  respect,  confidence,  and  love  of  all  the  people 
who  know  him  throughout  the  section  of  the  country  where  he  has 
spciii  his  years  of  toil,  in  the  relief  of  the  pains  and  sufferings  of  others,. 
I  undertake  to  say  that  Western  Maryland  can  produce  no  man  whose 
head  lias  been  whitened  by  the  frost  of  years  witli  so  much  honor  and 
so  much  credit  as  that  of  Dr.  Smith's.  Not  that  alone.  Did  not 
Dr.  Dougherty  tell  you,  also,  that  lie  was  there  in  that  office  and  that 
lie  heard  Dr.  Smith  ask  Mervin  McKaigto  take  his  papers  and  unbuckle 
his  belt,  and  that  the  doctor  saw  Mervin  McKaigwhen  he  unbuckled 
that  belt  and  put  it  around  his  body,  :it  the  request  of  Dr.  Smith. 
There  can  be  no  question  of  veracity  between  Dr.  Smith  and  Charles 
Medore.  Dr.  Dougherty  is  too  well  known,  as  well  as  Dr.  Smith,  to 
admit  of  that.  Now,  mark  the  locality  where  he  locates  this  pistol. 
Ten  feet  in  the  street,  when  their  very  next  witness,  a  colored  gentle- 
man, puts  it  on  the  pavement,  or  just  in  the  gutter.  Now,  the  next 
witness  called  is  Enos  Davis,  a  colored  man.  [  do  not  wish  to  com- 
ment harshly  upon  the  testimony  of  any  witness,  it  is  a  matter  en- 
tirely within  your  discretion  ami  judgment;  I  have  my  own  views 
about  it.  For  my  own  part,  I  do  not  believe  that  Enos  was  there  to  see 
anything  about  the  pistol.  I  think  he  was  on  the  other  side  of  the 
street  w  ii'n  his  horse  and  cart,  which  lie  tells  you  he  had  left  there. 
But  what  does  Davis  swear  to?  lie  swears  that  he  was  standing  by 
the  corner  of  the  bridge,  and  says  that  he  saw  nothing  in  this  man's 
hand,  but  that  he  saw  him  put  his  band  behind  his  hotly.  Now,  Enos 
Davis  was  standing  by  the  bridge;  Mr.  McKaig  was  walking  in  this 
direction  and  he  put,  bis  hand  behind  his  body  in  that  direction.  Could 
he  have  seen  anything  shine,  as  testified  to  by  him?  He  says,  how- 
ever, I  saw  McKaig  when  he  threw  up  bis  hands,  and  he  swears  that 
he  saw  nothing  in  them.  Now,  mark  that,  gentlemen.  What  does 
William  Wolf  say  ?  We  are  now  testing  the  accuracy  of  the  locality 
of  the  pistol,  which  they  say  was  the  third  pistol.  Mind  you,  gentle- 
men, Medore  had  testified  that  he  saw  the  pistol,  and  that  it  fell  ten 
feet  in  the  street.  Wolf  says  that  the  pistol  he  saw  fell  into  the  gutter, 
and  that  pistol  Turuey  picked  up.  Turney  picked  up  but  one  pistol,  so 
that  wherever  the  pistol  dropped  that  he  saw,  Turney  picked  it  up,  no 
matter  where  it  might  be.  We  shall  see  hereafter  where  that  pistol  was 
that  Turney  picked  up. 

Now  we  come  to  the  testimony  of  John  Hipp,  the  man  who  went 
over  the  fence  in  the  back-yard  to  avoid  being  a  witness,  and  failed  to 
succeed.  You  saw  him  on  the  stand.  I  think  it  did  hhn  more  good 
while  he.  was  on  the  stand  than  anything  else  could  possibly  have  done 
him,  unless  he  had  gone  to  Baltimore  and  taken  one  of  those  hew  baths 
recently  introduced  there.  "What  does  he  say?  He  said  :  "  1  saw  Mc- 
Kaig running,  and  Black  after  him  ;  McKaig  run  across  the  street,  and 
Black  followed  him  ;  1  saw  McKaig  when  lie  fell ;  he  had  a  revolver  in 
his  hand. "  Therefore,  according  to  his  testimony,  he  saw  a  pistol  in 
McKaig\s  bain!  when  he  fell  in  the  street.  And  he  says  further  :  "I 
saw  the  pistol  in  his  hand  when  the  second  shot  was  fired. "     Now, 


FOR  KILLING  COLONEL  W.  W.  m'kATG,  JR.      163 

mark  it,  ho  saw  the  pistol  in  his  hum!  when  the  second  shot  was  fired, 
and  he  says  the  second  shot  was  fired  about  the  middle  of  the  street. 
Compare  this  with  the  testimonyof  Wolf,  who  saw  it  fall  in  the  gutter. 
And  this  is  the  man  who  informed  Mr.  Peter  Yarnell,  who  called  upon 
him  for  some  information,  that  if  he  did  not  go  away  lie  would  break 
his  damned  neck.  lie  says  farther  that  the  second  shot  was  tired  about 
the  middle  of  the  street,  and  the  third  shot  was  tired  as  he  got  on  the 
other  side.  Therefore,  he  must  have  seen  the  pistol  in  McKaig's  hands 
in  thf  middle  of  the  street,  because  he  saw  the  pistol  when  the  second 
shot  was  tired,  and  that  was  tired  in  the  middle  of  the  street. 

Now,  we  come  to  the  testimony  of  George  Garner,  another  colored 
witness,  and  I  leave  these  witnesses  with  you.  You  recollect  George 
Garner,  the  colored  man  from  Washington.  He  said  that  he  lived  in 
Washington,  but  had  been  in  Cumberland  several  weeks  without  work, 
that  he  left  his  home  that  morning,  and  met  a  stranger  in  the  street,  and 
stopped  him  at  that  hour  of  the  morning,  entering  with  him  into  conver- 
sation. A  most  remarkable  thing.  He  succeeded  in  getting  a  job.  He 
stopped  him  and  asked  him  about  work,  being  a  stranger.  He  knew  the 
people  in  Cumberland,  because,  when  I  asked  him  if  he  knew  a  man  by  a 
certain  name,  he  asked  if  that  was  the  policeman.  He  knew  a  policeman 
by  that  name  ;  he  had  made  himself  acquainted  with  that  class  of  the 
community  at  least.  He  knew  some  of  the  people  of  Cumberland,  but 
he  did  not  know  this  person  whom  he  stopped  to  talk  to  that  morning. 
Most  remarkable,  and  this  statement  that  lie  makes  is  more  than  remark- 
able, lie  said  both  of  these  parties  exhibited  pistols  after  the  second 
tin1,  and  he  said  when  McKaigrun  across  the  street  he  put  his  hands 
behind  his  back  and  tried  to  pull  a  pistol  out,  but  could  not.  Now, 
compare  this  statement  with  the  others  made  by  the  witnesses  exam- 
ined by  the  defense.  Medore  says  the  pistol  dropped  in  the  street  ten 
feet  from  the  gutter  ;  Wolf  says  it  fell  in  the  gutter;  Ilipps  says  he 
saw  McKaig  when  he  was  running  ;  that  he  had  a  pistol  in  his  ham], 
and  had  it  in  his  hand  when  he  fell.  And  now  comes  this  man.  all 
the  way  from  Washington,  and  he  says  that  both  parties  exhibited  pis- 
tols, but  he  saw  McKaig  when  he  run  across  the  street,  and  that  he 
then  put  his  hands  behind  his  back  and  tried  to  pull  a  pistol  out,  but 
could  not. 

Gentlemen,  can  you  reconcile  this  testimony?  And  this  is  the  only 
other  witness  who  test  dies  with  Medore  that  Black  was  standing  in 
front  of  McKaig  when  he  tired  the  last  shot,  a  fact  directly  in  conflict 
with  all  the  other  evidence;  in  the  cause,  coining  from  the  prisoner  as 
well  as  the  State. 

Then  we  have  the  testimony  of  Charles  Clark,  a  boy,  who  says  that 
he  did  no!  see  any  pistol  in  McKaig's  hands.  He  saw  the  pistol  fall 
during  the  time,  but  the  pistol  he  saw  fall  Mr.  Tiirney  picked  up.  This 
closes  their  testimony  on  the  theory  of  self-defense. 

Now,  gentlemen,  when  you  come  to  consider  human  testimony  how 
many  considerations,  how  many  facts,  and  how  many  circumstances 
are  to  be  viewed  ?  This  question  of  human  testimony  could  be  dis- 
cussed  at  great  length,  but  I  am  not  here  for  that  purpose  ;  it 
would  take,  too  much  of  your  time.  They  are  uncertain,  they  arc 
unreliable.  You  have  got  to  look  at  the  honesty  and  integrity  of  the 
witnesses;  their  appearance  upon  the  stand,  and  opportunities  for  ob- 
servation.    Now  let  us  apply  that  test  in  this  case.     In  tlie  first  place 


16-1  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

you  have  1 1 1« •  testimony  of  Dr.  Smitb  :  you  know  the  man  or,  at  least, 
I  trust  some  of  yon  do.    They  Bay  thai  they  have  the-  positive  testimony 
upon  one  side,  and  that  this  is  negative.    Th<  y  say  that  where  there  are 
two  men  in  a  room,  and  one  hears  the  clock  strike  and  the  other  does 
not,  that  ii  does  not  follow  that  the  clock  did  not  strike ;  thai  you  are 
to  determine  that  the  clock  did  strike.    Such  is  not  a  parallel  case  to 
this.    Here  was  the  same  thing  i<>  which  the  attention  of  these  differ- 
ent parties  was  called.    And  what  does  Dr.  Smith  tell  you?    He  tells 
3*ou  that,  simultaneously  with  the  firing,  being  in  full  view  of  the  par- 
ties, and  before  the  smoke  could  curl  and  raiseabove  his  head,  and 
while  McKaig  was  throwing  up  his  hands  in  this  imploring  manner — 
describing  it — he  looked,  but  he  saw  nothing  in  I  lie  hands  of  McKaig. 
lie  tells  you  from  that  time  until  the  time  McKaig's  soul  departed  his 
body,  he  was  not  over  live  or  nine  feet  from  his  person.     Therefore,  it 
would  have  been  utterly  impossible  for  him  to  have  had  anything  in 
his  hands  without  Dr.  Smith  having  seen  it  at  the.  time.     Now,  how 
was  the  locality  of  Dr.  Smith,  compared  with  these  other  witnesses  ? 
What  were  his  opportunities  for  observation  ?    What  are  his  powers  of 
recollection?     Then  we  come  to  Dr.  Ilealey.     Dr.  Ilealey  tells  you  the 
same  tiling,  and  what  were  his  powers  of  observation,  and  what  is  his 
integrity  in  the  community,  and  how  much  credit  is  to  be  given  him 
as  a  witness  on  this  stand  ?    Then  we  have  the  testimony  of  Mr.  Gross, 
who  states  to  you,  gentlemen,  that  he  saw  him  at  the  first  throWingup 
of  the  hand,  and  that  from  that  time  to  the.  time  of  his  death  there  was 
nothing  in  it.     Then  we  come  to  the  testimony  of  Mr.  Enfield.     What 
does  he  say?    He  says  that  he  was  approaching  the  body  as  they  were 
raising  it,  that  he  saw  this  pistol  fall  from  the  body,  and  that  that  was 
the  pistol  that  Mr.  Turney  picked  up.     Now,  he  tells  you  that  the  pis- 
tol that  dropped  from  McKaig's  body  was  picked  up  by  Mr.  Turney, 
and  Wolf,  Medore,  and  Clark  all  tell  you  that  the  pistol  they  saw  fall 
they  saw  Mr.  Turney  pick  up.     Now,  these  are  the  facts.     Then,  you 
have  the  testimony  of  Mr.  Cahill,  a  witness  who  was  examined  twice 
by  the  other  side  ;  a  highly  respectable  gentleman  from  Cumberland. 
He  says  that  his  impression  is  that,  as  he  approached  the  body,  he  saw 
something  fall  from  it ;  but  that  after  (he  body  had  been  taken  in  he  saw 
Mr.  Turney  take  up  the  pistol  from  the  spot  where  the  body  had  been 
lying.     Now,  look  at  these  things;  look  at  these  facts.     We  desire 
this  case  to  be  tried  upon  the  facts.     Then  we  have  the  testimony  of 
Mr.  Moorehead,  who  testifies  to  the  same  thing.     The  additional  testi- 
mony of  Dr.  Smith,  who  tells  you  that,  as  they  were  raising  the  body 
from  the  ground,  he  heard  something  jingle,  but  he  could  not  tell  what 
it  was.    But  they  say  why  not  bring  Mr.  Turney  here ?    Why  didn't 
we  bring  Mr.  McKaig  here?     And  tiiey  stated  that  Ik;  had   been  here 
during  the  whole  of  this  trial.     No  such  thing.     Mervin  McKaig  has 
been  here  but  one  or  two  days,  I  believe,  during  this  trial.     You  try 
this  case  upon  the  testimony  that  is  before  you,  and,  as  you  are  well 
aware,  it  often  occurs  that,  as  you  are  going  on  with  the.  case,  the  wit- 
ness is  not  in  court,  and  Mr.  Turney  was  not  in  Frederick  when  this 
testimony  was  going  on.     But  what  was  the  necessity  of  bringing  Mr. 
Turney  here  wizen  all   these  witnesses  swear  they  saw  Mr.  Turney 
pick  up  this  pistol,  and  tell  you  where  the  pistol  was  when  he  did 
pick  it  up. 
Now,  gentlemen,  where  did  this  self-defense  originate?     Here  is 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    m'KAIG,   JR.  165 

"Mr.  Wolf  hero,  a  witness  brought  into  Court  for  the  purpose  of  sus- 
taining this  theory  of  self-defense.  There  is  Dr.  Healey.  They  lived 
side  by  side;  they  frequently  compared  notes.  Dr.  Healey  tells  you, 
in  reference  to  this  occurrence,  that  they  talked  this  thing  over ;  and 
yet  Dr.  Healey  tells  you  that  be  never  heard  it  whispered  ai n >•  «t  a  pis- 
tol in  Mr.  McKaig's  hands  until  he  came  into  this  court.  Now.  is  not 
thai  remarkable?  Is  it  not  singular?  How,  upon  any  known  princi- 
ple of  human  action,  is  it  to  he  accounted  for? 

I  pay  again,  this  question  of  sell-defense  was  an  after-thought,  not, 
dreamed  of  by  t In*  respectable  people  of  Cumberland,  till  the  com- 
mencement of  this  trial.  The  gentlemen  say  we  have  not  brought  any 
person  here  to  attack  the  character  of  their  witnesses  upon  the  ques- 
tion of  self-defense.  The  answer  to  that  is  (hat  they  had  no  character 
to  attack  ;  no  one  knew  them  as  to  character,  either  for  good  or  had. 

And  now,  gentlemen  of  the  jury,  let  us  pause  for  a  moment,  and 
pass  in  review  before  our  minds  the  ground  over  which  we  have 
traveled,  and  the  conclusions  to  which  the  human  judgment  is  neces- 
sarily driven  by  a  proper  examination  of  this  cause.  We  have  shown 
that  the  deceased,  W.  VV.  McKaig,  on  the  morning'  of  the  day  named 
in  the  indiei  1 1 lent,  in  the  city  of  Cumberland,  came  to  his  death  by  the 
hand  of  violence  in  a  most  cruel  and  revengeful  manner,  and  in  a  way 
that  could  only  have  been  prompted  by  a  coward's  heart.  We  have 
shown  you  that  this  deed  was  perpetrated  by  the  prisoner,  Crawford 
Black;  that  he  did  the  deed  with  a  specific  intention  to  take  life,  and 
that  the  taking  of  that  life  upon  that  morning  was  preceded  by  such 
lying  in  wait  as  the  statute  law  of  your  State  solemnly  enacts  shall  he 
murder  in  the  first  degree.  Standing  upon  this  law  and  these  facts 
the  case  is  plain  and  clean-. 

Our  attention  has  been  next  called  to  the  answer  attempted  to  he  set, 
up  to  such  a  case  as  this,  and  in  that  connection  we  have  examined 
the  question  of  seduction,  the  theory  that  he  acted  under  that  belief, 
and  the  theory  <>t  self-defense.  Upon  this  question  of  seduction  I  have 
shown  you,  gentlemen,  that,  for  the.  first  time  in  the  history  of  this 
case,  when  they  were  called  upon  to  act,  when  the  time  of  talking  had 
passed,  and  the  time  for  action  had  arrived,  and  they  had  been  told  by 
the  ruling  of  the  Court  in  relation  to  the  letter,  that  they  were  at  lib- 
erty to  go  into  evidence  of  those  faeis  connected  wilii  (lie  charge  of 
seduction  communicated  to  the  prisoner,  we  are  then  gravely  told  by 
thecounselon  the  other  side, for  the  first  time,  that  the  question  of 
seduction  is  not  in  (he  case,  and  they  think,  from  the  efforl  to  prove 
it — for  you  are  to  hear  in  mind,  gentlemen,  that  while  the  Court  said 
that  seduction,  as  an  issue  to  be  tried,  was  not  in  the  case,  they  also 
said  that,  as  &faet  which  had  been  communicated  to  the  prisoner  on 
the  Sunday,  il  was  in  the  case,  and  as  a  fact  so  communicated  it  was 
admissible  in  evidence,  che  same  as  the  letter.  Now,  while  I  am  here 
to  confess  that  I  am  as  yet  unable  to  understand  clearly  the  legal  prin- 
ciple Upon  Which  that  letter  is  made  admissible.  I  am  hen*  to  say  that 
the  ruling  of  the  Court,  making  that  letter  admissible,  opened  wide 

t  he  doors  to  the  prisoner's  counsel  to  make  good  their  groundless  asser- 
tion-, hi  lered  upon  all  occasions  during  the  trial,  and  though  urgently 
requested  by  the  prosecution,  they  as  steadily  and  persistently  de- 
clined to  enter.  Driven  from  this  stronghold  of  their  defense,  we  have 
next  examined  their  position  as  they  entrenched  themselves  be- 
hind  the    theory    that    In*    acted     under    that     belief;    and    we    have 


166  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

shown  you  that,  from  the  evidence,  it  is  impossible  he  could  have 
entertained  any  such  belief  at  the  time  he  committed  the  homi- 
cide; and  thai  no  reasonable  grounds  existed  for  any  sane,  sensible 
man  to  have  entertained  any  such  belief.  We  might  have  gone 
further,  and  shown  you  that,  had  he  even  acted  under  such  a  belief,  it. 
would,  be  to  him  uo  shield  of  protection  under  the  law,  bul  would  be 
only  evidence  going  to  show  a  motive  for  committing  a  cruel  and  re 
vengeful  t.\cri\.  But,  gentlemen,  in  a  case  like  this,  so  barren  of  evi- 
dence to  support  the  alleged  facts,  it  seemed  to  me  but  an  insult  to 
your  intelligence  to  consume  your  time  and  exhaust  your  patience  in 
reading  from  the  law  books,  tor  the  purpose  of  showing  what  is  a  legal 
provocation,  which,  it' acted  upon  at  the  moment,  maysei*ve  to  reduce 
the  crime  from  a  higher  to  a  lower  grade.  No  such  legal  provocation 
existed  in  this  ease,  and  none  has  been  attempted  to  he  established. 
Passing  from  this  question  of  belief,  we  have  next  examined  the 
theory  of  self-defense,  endeavored  to  ascertain  where  and  when  it, 
originated,  and  to  show  how  entirely  inconsistent  it  is  with  the  relia- 
ble testimony  in  the  cause.  We  have  ^~r]i  how  utterly  inconsistent 
this  defense  is  with  that  which  was  so  boldly  announced  in  the  open- 
ing statement  of  Mr.  Syester;  how  the  two  are  necessarily  antago- 
nistic one  to  the  other,  and  how  utterly  unreconcilable  it  is  with  the 
statements  of  the  prisoner,  when  he  stood  by  the  dead  body  of  his  vic- 
tim, with  everything  fresh  upon  his  mind,  and  before  time  had  been 
allowed  for  able  and  ingenious  friends  to  manufacture  a  defense. 
Having  done  this,  gentlemen,  in  my  humble  judgment,  the  case  is  be- 
fore you  in  all  its  bearings.  Jts  legitimate  points  of  argument  have 
been  presented,  and  the  other  matters  upon  which  so  much  time  and 
eloquence  have  been  expended  are  but  foreign  and  collateral  to  the 
real  and  true  issues  in  the  case.  1  am  well  aware,  gentlemen,  how,  in 
desperate  causes,  able  and  ingenius  counsel  seek  to  raise  false  issues, 
that  may  Serve  to  disturb  and  distract  the  mind  of  the  jury,  and  en- 
deavor to  lead  the  counsel  upon  the  other  side  into  a  discussion  of 
those  rather  than  the  true  questions  involved  in  the  decision  of  the 
case.  Gentlemen,  I,  for  one,  have  ho  intention  of  being  thus  lead 
into  such  an  error,  and  be  drawn  from  a  consideration  of  the  plain 
principles  upon  which  this  cause,  should  be  determined.  1  have  en- 
deavored to  lay  those  principles  before  you,  and  upon  you,  gentlemen, 
must,  rest  the  responsibility.  But,  gentlemen  of  the  jury,  many  col- 
lateral questions  have  been  brought  into  the  argument  of  this  cause  by 
the  counsel  upon  the  other. side;  and  allow  me  to  say— anil  I  say  it 
with  the  greatest  respect  to  the  distinguished  ability  and  learning  rep- 
resented upon  the  other  side — that,  in  my  humble  judgment,  their 
entire  arguments,  With  but  slight  exceptions,  have  been  devoted  to  a 
discussion  of  these  collateral  matters,  that  arc  foreign  to  the  true  issues 
in  this  cause. 

Before  leaving  the  case  in  your  hands,  however,  gentlemen,  it  is 
proper  that  1  should  call  your  attention  to  some  of  those  suggestions 
that  have  been  made,  and  I  beg  you  to  bear  in  mind  that  I  do  it  not 
as  a  matter  of  argument  of  what  1  conceive  to  be  the  true  questions 
involved  in  the  merits  of  this  case,  but  to  caution  you  lest  your  minds 
may  have  been  disturbed  by  their  introduction  into  the  case.  First 
it  has  been  loudly  declaimed  against  that  this  cause  has  been  removed 
from  Alleghany  county  to  this  for  trial.  And  pray,  gentlemen,  what 
have  you  to  do  with  that  fact?    How  does  that  bear  upon  the  question 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    m'kAIG,   JR.  167 

of  guilt  or  innocence?  What  element,  either  in  point  of  fact  or 
law  (Iocs  that  removal  furnish  you,  to  assist  you  in  arriving  at  a  cor- 
rect conclusion  F  But  it  is  said  that  the  prosecution  was  afraid  of  the 
public  sentiment  <>l'  Cumberland.  Gentlemen,  he  was  not  to  be  tried 
at  the  bar  of  public  opinion;  that  had  given  forth  its  verdict  on  the 
day  of  the  burial,  when  the  native  city  of  the  deceased  was  dressed  in 
mourning,  her  business  suspended,  and  her  population  turned  out  en 
masse  to  attend  his  funeral.  But,  gentlemen,  he  was  to  be  tried  be- 
fore twelve  men,  eight  of  which  had  been  selected,  when  the  State's 
attorney  of  that  county  made  his  affidavit  that  he  believed  the  State 
could  not  have  a  Fair  and  impartial  trial.  It  has  been  asked  why 
should  I  his  wealthy  and  powerful  family,  the  McKaig's,  seek  some 
other  locality.  Gentlemen,  they  had  no  more  to  do  with  it  than  either 
one  of  you  upon  lhi>  panel ;  they  had  no  voice  in  the  matter.  It  was 
the  action  of  the  State  through  its  official,  acting  under  the  responsi- 
bility of  his  official  oath,  and  adding  to  that  bis  special  affidavit  that, 
in  bis  opinion,  a  fair  trial  could  not  be  had  before  the  men  already 
selected.  And,  gentlemen,  the  counsel  who  last  addressed  you,  Mr. 
Voorhees,  has  even  gone  so  far  as  to  announce  it  as  his  opinion  that 
the  law  authorizing  such  a  removal  is  unconstitutional,  and  be  lias 
cited  from  that  instrument  to  show  that  every  man  is  entitled  to  be 
put  upon  his  trial  in  the  locality  where  the  occurrence  took  place. 
Gentlemen,  is  it  possible  that  the  learned  counsel  has  forgotten  that 
the  very  instrument  he  reads  from,  the  constitution  of  Maryland,  guar- 
antees this  right  of  removal;  that  it  is  a  right  standing  higher  than 
any  mere  law  of  the  legislature — it  is  a  constitutional  power,  and  if 
the  Slate's  attorney  of  Alleghany  county  bad  failed  to  call  into  exercise 
thai  power,  in  a  proper  case,  he  would  have  been  recreant  to  his  duty 
and  false  to  the  oath  under  which  lie  acted.  Gentlemen,  it  is  nothing 
new  in  the  history  of  Maryland.  It  has  been  done  by  her  former  at- 
torney general,  when  eleven  jurors  were  sworn,  and  the  Court  then 
asked  by  that  officer  if  it  was  expected  of  him  to  lay  the  case  before 
that  jury.  But  what,  gentlemen,  have  yon  to  do  with  this  question? 
The  prisoner  is  constitutionally  here,  and  you  are  sworn  to  try  the 
case  upon  the  law  and  the  evidence.  Will  you  do  that,  or  will  you  devote 
your  time  in  trying  the  propriety  of  the  action  of  the  State's  attorney 
of  Alleghany  county,  and  the  court  of  that  county  in  removing  this 
case.  No,  gentlemen,  this  is  one  of  those  false  issues  they  have  at- 
tempted to  raise.  Let  it  not,  like  a  false  light,  serve  to  mislead  your 
judgments. 

But,  gentlemen,  another  thing  has  been  commented  upon,  and  that 
is  the  presence  ol  the  McKaig  family  during  the  trial.  Gentlemen, 
this  i<  no  common  and  ordinary  ease  ;  the  life  of  this  son  and  brother 
has  not,  only  been  taken,  but  an  unauthorized  and  unjustifiable  attempt 
has  been  made  lo  throw  over  his  grave  the  mantle  of  shame,  and 
they  are  here,  in  this  temple  of  justice,  as  [heir  son  was,  when  he 
sought  a  judicial  tribunal  to  vindicate  the  truth.    Gentlemen,  that 

effort  COSt  him  his  lite;  but  I  can  say  to  the  counsel  upon  the  other 
side,  that  come  life  or  come  death,  while  that  aged  and  sorrow- 
Stricken  father,  that  bOSOUl-Companion  of  former  years  who  has  t  rav- 
eled so  tar  onward  with  him  in  the  pathway  of  life ;  those  brothers, 
hone  of  the  same  bone,  and  flesh  of  the  same  flesh,  nursed  at  the  same 
breast,  rocked  in  the  same  cradle,  and  taught  the  same  prayers  beside 
the  same  mother's  knees,  so  long  as  they  shall  live  not  a  stone  will  be 


1G3  TRIAL    OF    HARRY    CRAWFORD    BLACK 

left  unturned  to  vindicate  the  memory  of  the.  dead  and  do  justice  to 
the  living  he  has  left  behind. 

No.  gentlemen,  if  w.  \V.  BlcKaig  had  never  appealed  to  a  tribunal 
of  justice  to  have  the  truth  vindicated,  you  never  would  have  been 
called  upon  to  try  this  case.  He  did  call  upon  it,  and  ii  became  ne- 
iry  for  a  defense  to  be  prepared,  and  it  was  prepared,  and  pre- 
sented points  of  brevity  and  cruelty  never  before  excelled  in  the  his- 
tory of  civilized  society. 

Again,  a  day  and  a  half  was  consumed  by  the  defense  in  his  effort 
to  establish  a  good  character.  In  some,  cases  of  extreme  doubt,  1  ad- 
mit, this  becomes  of  the  utmosl  importance,  and  I  would  nor  be  un- 
derstood as  underrating  its  full  value  ;  but  in  a  case  like  this,  how  far 
docs  ii  bearupon  the  true  issue  involved?  The  fact  of  the  killing  has 
been  proved,  it  is  admitted.  No  probabilities  are  to  be  weighed  and 
considered,  in  the  weighing  of  which  character  may  be  considered. 
An  act  admitted  to  be  done  is  the  same  whether  committed  by  a  man 
of  good,  or  by  one  whose  character  is  unknown.  I  can  not  better  illus- 
trate the  li: tie  importance  to  be  at  tached  to  this  than  by  referring  you 
to  the  ruling  of  the  Court  (Judge  Bowie  dissenting)  when  we  offered  in 
evidence  the  good  character  of  the  deceased.  They  had  offered  evi- 
dence of  good  character  of  Black  to  rebut  the  theory  of  the  State,  that 
he  made  an  attack  upon  MeKaig ;  they  then  put  in  the  plea  that 
McKaig  made  an  attack  upon  Black,  and  upon  the  same  ground  we 
offered  the  same  evidence,  to  rehut  the  same  theory,  and  the  majority 
of  the  Court  ruled  it  out.  [f  the  Court  had  supposed  il  of  much  force 
in  behalf  of  the  prisoner,  they  certainly  would  not  have  denied  it  to 
the  State,  when  in  the  one  ease  it  stood  precisely  upon  the  same  legal 
grounds  as  it  did  in  the  other. 

Gentlemen,  1  have  briefly  called  your  attention  to  some  of  these  co- 
1  ate  nil  matters  that  have  been  brought  into  this  case.  I  trust  I  have 
not  done  it  in  such  a  way,  and  to  such  an  extent,  as  to  lead  your 
minds  from  the  true  questions  that  are  involved.  There  is  much  more 
I  would  like  to  say,  and  many  comments  I  would  like  to  make, 
especially  upon  the  opening  statement  of  my  friend,  Mr.  Syester;  but 
I  feel  such  a  course  would  serve  rather  to  confuse  than  enlighten,  and 
I  must,  the  re  lore,  leave  thi<  case  in  your  hands.  Gentlemen,  a  terrible 
crime  has  been  committed,  human  rights  have  been  trampled  upon, 
the  laws  have  been  grossly  violated,  and  society  has  been  outraged. 
A  fellow-citizen,  in  tin,'  prime  of  life,  in  the  full  vigor  and  strength  of 
his  manhood,  one  beloved  and  respected  by  those  with  whom  he  had 
been  associated  from  his  boyhood,  has  been  cut  down  in  the  public 
streets  of  your  sister  city,  Cumberland;  a  homicide  unparalleled  in 
cruelty  and  ferociousness  has  been  committed  upon  one  of  her  leading 
citizens,  a  man  largely  engaged  in  business,  the  head  of  a  family,  and 
a  most  useful  member  of  society;  and,  gentlemen,  the  perpetrator  is 
before  you.  Do  we  live  in  a  land  of  law  and  order?  Is  human  life  of 
any  value?  Has  it  any  security?  Have  our  homes  any  protection? 
Will  the  government  under  which  we  live  discharge  its  obligations ? 
Shall  we  continue  to  pay  taxes  to  support  our  courts  of  justice?  Is  a 
premium  to  be  paid  for  lawless  violence?  Is  this  fearful  tragedy  com- 
mitted in  Cumberland  to  be  ended  in  a  disgraceful  farce  in  Frederick? 
Gentlemen,  in  the  verdict  you  shall  render  will  be  found  an  answer  to 
these  several  questions,  and  to  that  verdict  will  the  people  of  your 
State  look  for  the  lesson  they  are  to  be  taught.     For  its  teachings  they 


FOR    KILLING    COLONEL    W.    W.    M'KAIG.  169 

will  hold  you  responsible,  and  its  influence  will  descend  upon  your 

children  and  your  children's  children.     Pause  ere  yon  deal   lightly 
with  the  rights  of  society,  and  reflect,  lesl  you  allow  the  Government 

under  which  you  live  to  prove  recreant,  to  its  most  solemn  obligations. 
Gentlemen,  I  have  endeavored  to  discharge  my  duly  in  fairness  and 
candor.  I  have  left  much  unsaid  that  1  should  have  said,  and  I  must 
trust  to  you  to  supply  the  omissions  ;  and  I  trust,  gentlemen,  that,  you 
will  so  discharge  the  high  and  responsible  duties  resting  upon  you. 
that  when  the  wintry  winds  of  fourscore  years  and  ten  shall  have 
whitened  your  heads  wiih  their  frosts,  when  the  heavy  hand  of  time 
shall  have  Lowed  your  forms,  and  your  tottering  footsteps  shall  linger 
upon  the  confines  of  the  grave,  when,  according  to  the  laws  of  nature, 
you  shall  begin  to  live  amid  the  memories  of  the  past,  forgetting  the 
things  of  yesterday  and  remembering  those  of  years  gone  by,  yon  may 
look  hack  upon  this  scene  ami  thank  your  God  that  you  have  been  the 
humble  instrument,  in  his  hands  of  upholding  the  dignity  of  the  laws, 
and  vindicating  the  immutable  principles  of  justice  and  of  truth.  And 
I  trust  that  the  verdict  you  may  render  shall  be  such  an  one  as  shall 
carry  a  sense  of  security  to  every  household  in  the  land,  and  shall 
stamp  you  as  men,  who,  knowing  your  duty,  dared  perform  it. 
Gentlemen,  the  case  is  in  your  hands. 


THE    ACQUITAL. 


Ami  now  we  conic  to  the  last  day*.-  proceedings.  Jr  is  the  10th day 
of  the  trial  and  will  be  the  last.  A  few  hours  and  the  prisoner  walks 
forth  free  among  his  fellow  men,  or  is  doomed  to  an  early,  awful 
death.  He  will  scon  step  from  the  prisoners  box  to  the.  enjoyment  of 
Liberty  and  the  cordial  congratulations  of  a  large  circle  of  friend-,  or 
will  leave  it  to  ascend  the  giddy,  terrible  height  of  the  scaffold.  It  is 
a  clear,  beautiful  day,  the  21st  of  April,  1871,  and  what  will  be  the  re- 
sult of  this  long  investigation  will  soon  be  revealed  to  the  throng  of 
anxious  inquirers  present. 

Long  before  the  hour  designated  for  the  opening  of  t lie  court  the 
largest  crowd  ever  witnessed  in  the  hall  of  justice  in  Frederick  county 
had  gathered  there,  and  hundreds  pressed  the  outer  door,  unable  to 
gain  entrance.  Within  the  bar  •were  many  distinguished  legal  gentle- 
man from  different  parts  of  the  country,  and  a  number  of  Senators 
.n\d  Members  of  Congress,  taking  advantage  of  the  adjournment  of 
Congress,  had  arrived  to  witness  the  finale  of  this  important  trial. 

A.S  the  bell  in  the  court-house  dome  announced  the  hour  of  nine,  the 
three  judges  entered.  At  ten  minutes  after  nine  Chief  Justice  Maulsby 
let  fall  the  gavel,  and  breathless  silence  at  oncereigned  over  the  vast 
issembly.  Justice  Maulsby  asked  if  all  were  ready. to  proceed,  and 
lirected  Mr.  Voorhees  toopen  his  case  to  the  jury. 

Mr.  Voorhees  arose,  and  paused  as  though  oppressed  by  a  sense  ot 
;  he  great  responsibility  resting  on  him — at  once  all  eyes  of  that  vast  con- 
course were  riveted  upon  the  spot  where  he  stood — and,  (bra  moment, 
.due--  was  absolutely  appalling.    Then,  as  it  were,  gathering  up 
the  resources  of  his  splendid  genius  and  marvelous  oratory,  in  a  clear, 
firm  voice,  Mr.  Voorhees  proceeded  to  address  the  jury,  dwelling  first 
somewhat al  length  upon  the  remarkable  character  the  boy  at  the 
bar  had  developed,  even  by  the  mouths  of  adverse  witnesses.    With 
bless  eloquence  and  consummate  skill   he  reverted  to  the  dif- 
ference in  position  and  circumstances  of  the  families  of  McKaig  and 
Black— i he  influence  and  wealth  of  the  one.  the  simple  integrity  and 
respectability  of  the  other.    For  three  horn-sand  thirty  minutes  he 
held  the  audience  spell-bound,  moving  thin  often  to  tears.    A-  he 
dosed,  a  very  audible  movement  of  applause  was  promptly  checked  by 
!>••  Court,  and  Justice  Maulsby  proposed  a  recess  for  a  few  minutes. 

At  fifteen  minutes  before  one  o'clock  the  court  re-assembled,  ami  in 


172  TRIAL    OF    HARRY   CRAWFORD   BLACK. 

five  minutes  Mr.  Whitney  began  his  closing  address  to  the  jury,  s] 
ing  two  hours.    The  case  was  given  to  thejurya  few  minutes  before 
three  o'clock,  and  they  retired. 

Thai  was  a  moment  of  profound  and  eager  interest.  None  who  wit- 
nessed but  shared,  none  "who  shared  can  ever  forget.  Amid  the  in- 
tense emotion  and  excitement  of  that  hour,  perhaps  no  one  was,  out- 
wardly at  least,  more  self-possessed  and  composed  than  the  prisoner, 
who  sat  pallid,  but  calm  and  quiet. 

At  five  minutes  after  lour  o'clock  the  bailiff  entering,  notified  the 
Chief  Justice  that  the  jury  had  agreed  upon  a  verdict.  Justice  Maulsby 
directed  them  to  be  brought  in,  and  they  entered  at  eight  minutes  after 
lour  o'clock. 

When  they  were  seated  the  clerk  directed  the  prisoner  to  stand  up. 
lie  stood  erect  and  firm,  with  his  clear  black  eyes  looking  full  into  the 
faces  of  the  jurors,  the  audience  scarcely  seemed  to  breathe,  and  the 
stillness  was  painful  when  the  jury  Mere  asked  if  they  were  agreed 
upon  a  verdict.  The  reply  being  in  the  affirmative,  the  clerk  said: 
''Gentlemen  of  the  jury,  look  upon  the  prisoner  at  the  bar  and  say 
is  he  guilty  or  not  guilty  ? 

In  a  distinct  voice  the  foreman.  Mr.  William  Feaga,  replied,  "  jSTot 
GriLiv  !  " 

The  pent-up  emotions  of  the  crowd  could  he  no  longer  controlled  by 
the  forms  of  judicial  demeanor.  One  deafening  yell  shook  the  build- 
ing from  dome  to  foundation,  and  like  a  resistless  torrent  the  entire 
assembly  rushed  forward,  as  if  to  seize  him  in  their  arms,  and  bear 
him  out  of  the  court-room.  Sheriff  Lamon  embraced  him  with  tear- 
ful affection.  Releasing  himself  as  soon  as  possible  from  the  crowd 
that  seemed  unable  to  find  words  to  express  the  admiration  and  deep 
feeling  with  which  his  conduct,  during  the  trial,  had  inspired  them, 
Barry  Black  rejoined  his  mother,  who  stood  weeping  within  the  bar. 
The  joy  of  that  gentle,  much-enduring  mother's  heart,  who  can  tell, 
in  this,  the  hour  of  her  son's  triumph,  the  hour  that,  gives  him  hack- 
to  her  almost  from  the  jaws  of  death  ?  Let  us  draw  a  veil  before  emo- 
tion so  sacred — joy  so  profound. 

Going  to  the  hotel  from  the  court-house  he  was  visited  by  hundreds 
Of  friends  and  acquaintances  eager  to  congratulate  him,  and  to  assure 
him  of  his  deep,  firm  hold  upon  their  esteem  and  affection.  T5y  his 
countrymen  and  his  country's  laws  he  has  been  purged  of  the  crime 
for  which  he  was  tried.  lie,  with  freedom,  treads  the  walks  of  peaceful 
life  again  by  their  consent.  In  true  christian  spirit,  let  the  past,  with 
all  its  fearful  memories,  be  forgotten  h3r  all,  and  the  future  looked  to 
as  the  time  wherein  all  wrongs  may  be  atoned  and  youthful  virtues 
ripened  into  holy  attributes. 


^MILTON    )VhITNEY.    ^Sq 


